Paternal Exposure to Ionizing Radiation in Ontario Uranium Miners and Risk of Congenital Anomaly in Offspring: A Record Linkage Case-control Study

• Main Author: Nahm, Sang-Myong
• Other Authors: Marrett, Loraine
• Language: en_ca
• Published: 2012
• Subjects: Ionizing radiation; uranium; uranium miners; radon; gamma ray; radiation measurement; radiation effects; occupational exposure; occupational health and safety; environmental exposure; paternal exposure; paternal exposure delayed effects; male reproduction; transgenerational effect; pregnancy outcome; congenital anomaly; birth defect; infant; offspring; live birth; record linkage; case control study; 0766; 0354; 0573
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/1807/32779

Objective: To determine if paternal preconception exposure to ionizing radiation through uranium mining increases the risk of congenital anomaly (CA) in offspring. Methods: A population-based matched case-control study was conducted. Cases were infants with CAs recorded in the Canadian Congenital Anomalies Surveillance System and born alive in Ontario 1979-86 (ICD-9 codes 740-759); controls were liveborn infants without CAs identified from Ontario birth certificates and individually matched to cases (case-control file {CCF}). Exposed fathers were identified through the linkage of the CCF to the Mining Master File or the National Dose Registry file, which include those who worked in Ontario uranium mines 1952-1986. For men who linked with a case or control child, radon, gamma and total gonadal doses were estimated for three preconception periods: entire, 3-months and 6-months. Odds ratios were estimated using conditional logistic regression. Results: Linkage of 28,991 uranium miners and 40,482 case-control pairs of fathers and offspring in the CCF identified 431 discordant pairs. There was no evidence of increased risk of a child having a CA if the father was ever a uranium miner before conception of the child (OR=0.89, 95% CI=0.74–1.08). Since gamma radiation (especially during the 6-month preconception period) is more biologically relevant to gonads than radon, further analyses were performed on 117 discordant pairs where data on gamma exposures were available. When ever/never miner, exposed to gamma (yes/no), and gamma dose-response variables were all in the model, there was no ever/never miner effect (OR=1.20, 95% CI=0.85–1.69, p-value=0.30), an inverse association for exposure to gamma (OR=0.42, 95% CI=0.25–0.71, p-value=0.001), but most importantly, there was no statistically significant dose-response relationship between gamma dose during the 6-month preconception period and all CAs (OR=1.15 per loge {mSv+0.01}, 95% CI=0.83–1.59, p-value=0.40). Similarly, no dose-response relationship was observed for exposure to gamma radiation in the 3-month preconception period, or for radon or total gonadal radiation in the 3- or 6-month preconception periods. Conclusion: There was no increased risk of a CA among liveborn children of Ontario uranium miners who were exposed to radon, gamma or total radiation during the 3- or 6-month periods before conception.