RESUMEN
In the United States, the Federal Aviation Administration has officially classified flight crews (FC) consisting of commercial pilots, cabin crew, or flight attendants as "radiation workers" since 1994 due to the potential for cosmic ionizing radiation (CIR) exposure at cruising altitudes originating from solar activity and galactic sources. Several epidemiological studies have documented elevated incidence and mortality for several cancers in FC, but it has not yet been possible to establish whether this is attributable to CIR. CIR and its constituents are known to cause a myriad of DNA lesions, which can lead to carcinogenesis unless DNA repair mechanisms remove them. But critical knowledge gaps exist with regard to the dosimetry of CIR, the role of other genotoxic exposures among FC, and whether possible biological mechanisms underlying higher cancer rates observed in FC exist. This review summarizes our understanding of the role of DNA damage and repair responses relevant to exposure to CIR in FC. We aimed to stimulate new research directions and provide information that will be useful for guiding regulatory, public health, and medical decision-making to protect and mitigate the risks for those who travel by air.
Asunto(s)
Radiación Cósmica , Daño del ADN , Exposición Profesional , Humanos , Radiación Cósmica/efectos adversos , Exposición Profesional/efectos adversos , Reparación del ADN , Radiación Ionizante , Neoplasias Inducidas por Radiación/etiología , Neoplasias Inducidas por Radiación/genética , Neoplasias/etiología , Neoplasias/genéticaRESUMEN
Aircrew (consisting of flight attendants, pilots, or flight engineers/navigators) are exposed to cosmic ionizing radiation (CIR) at flight altitude, which originates from solar activity and galactic sources. These exposures accumulate over time and are considerably higher for aircrew compared to the general population, and even higher compared to U.S. radiation workers. Many epidemiological studies on aircrew have observed higher rates of specific cancers compared to the general population. Despite high levels of CIR exposure and elevated rates of cancer in aircrew, a causal link between CIR and cancer has yet to be established. Many challenges still exist in effectively studying this relationship, not the least of which is evaluating CIR exposure separately from the constellation of factors that occur as part of the flight environment. This review concentrates on cancer incidence and mortality observed among aircrew in epidemiologic studies in relation to CIR exposure and limitation trends observed across the literature. The aim of this review is to provide an updated comprehensive summary of the literature that will support future research by identifying epidemiological challenges and highlighting existing increased cancer concerns in an occupation where CIR exposure is anticipated to increase in the future.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Exposición a la Radiación , Humanos , Exposición a la Radiación/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Flight attendants may have an increased risk of some cancers from occupational exposure to cosmic radiation and circadian disruption. METHODS: The incidence of thyroid, ovarian, and uterine cancer among â¼6000 female flight attendants compared to the US population was evaluated via life table analyses. Associations of these cancers, melanoma, and cervical cancer with cumulative cosmic radiation dose and metrics of circadian disruption were evaluated using Cox regression. RESULTS: Incidence of thyroid, ovarian, and uterine cancer was not elevated. No significant, positive exposure-response relations were observed. Weak, non-significant, positive relations were observed for thyroid cancer with cosmic radiation and time zones crossed and for melanoma with another metric of circadian disruption. CONCLUSIONS: We found little evidence of increased risk of these cancers from occupational cosmic radiation or circadian disruption in female flight attendants. Limitations include few observed cases of some cancers, limited data on risk factors, and misclassification of exposures.