The International Commission on Radiological Protection recommends the adoption of the linear, no-threshold model as a predictive risk model for radiation protection purposes since the relationship between low-dose radiation exposure and cancer risk is unclear. Medical radiation workers are subject to occupational exposures and differences in workload, area of work and types of exposure can lead to variations in exposures between different occupational groups. We investigated the occupational exposures of 572 workers from four departments in two community hospitals and stratified into 22 occupational groups in order to identify groups with the highest radiation exposure. The occupational doses from 2015 to 2019 were analyzed to identify the dose distribution of each occupational group, total number of monitored workers, annual and collective deep (Hp(10)), eye (Hp(3)) and shallow (Hp(0.07)) doses. We further determined the individual and occupational group lifetime doses as well as the probability that monitored workers’ lifetime doses will exceed a specified lifetime dose level. The occupational groups with the highest radiation exposures were the nuclear medicine technologists, diagnostic imaging radiologists and diagnostic cardiologists. Although our data suggest that occupational doses reported are low, it is essential that exposure of occupationally exposed personnel are always kept as low as reasonably achievable with an effective radiation protection program.

Background: Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy and the third leading cause of death among Canadian men. The standard treatment modalities for prostate cancer include prostatectomy, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy and chemotherapy or any combination depending on the stage of the tumour. However, several studies have reported that tobacco smoking at the time of diagnosis and during treatment can potentially impact treatment efficacy, outcome and patients quality of life after treatment. Materials and methods: This narrative literature review elucidates the impacts of tobacco smoking on prostate cancer progression, treatment efficacy, including its effects on prostatectomy, radiation therapy and chemotherapy, risk of cancer recurrence and mortality and quality of life after treatment. Furthermore, we discuss the importance of integrating a smoking cessation programme into the treatment regimen for prostate cancer patients in order to yield more favourable treatment outcomes, reduce risk of recurrence and mortality and increase the quality of life after treatment for prostate cancer patients. Conclusions: Smoking cessation is one of the most important interventions to prevent cancer and it is also essential after the diagnosis of prostate cancer to improve clinical outcomes. All prostate cancer patients should be advised to quit tobacco use since it can potentially improve treatment response rates and survival, as well as reduce the risk of developing treatment complications and potentially improve the quality of life after treatment. There are several benefits to smoking cessation and it should become an important component of the cancer care continuum in all oncology programmes, starting from prevention of cancer through diagnosis, treatment, survivorship and palliative care. Evidence-based smoking cessation intervention should be sustainably integrated into any comprehensive cancer programme, and the information should be targeted to the specific benefits of cessation in cancer patients.