IntroductionThe cancer risk of radiation exposure in the moderate-to-high dose range has been well established. However, the risk remains unclear at low-dose ranges with protracted low-dose rate exposure, which is typical of occupational exposure. Several epidemiological studies of Korean radiation workers have been conducted, but the data were analysed retrospectively in most cases. Moreover, groups with relatively high exposure, such as industrial radiographers, have been neglected. Therefore, we have launched a prospective cohort study of all Korean radiation workers to assess the health effects associated with occupational radiation exposure.Methods and analysisApproximately 42 000 Korean radiation workers registered with the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission from 2016 to 2017 are the initial target population of this study. Cohort participants are to be enrolled through a nationwide self-administered questionnaire survey between 24 May 2016 and 30 June 2017. As of 31 March 2017, 22 982 workers are enrolled in the study corresponding to a response rate of 75%. This enrolment will be continued at 5-year intervals to update information on existing study participants and recruit newly hired workers. Survey data will be linked with the national dose registry, the national cancer registry, the national vital statistics registry and national health insurance data via personal identification numbers. Age-specific and sex-specific standardised incidence and mortality ratios will be calculated for overall comparisons of cancer risk. For dose–response assessment, excess relative risk (per Gy) and excess absolute risk (per Gy) will be estimated with adjustments for birth year and potential confounders, such as lifestyle factors and socioeconomic status.Ethics and disseminationThis study has received ethical approval from the institutional review board of the Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences (IRB No. K-1603-002-034). All participants provided written informed consent prior to enrolment. The findings of the study will be disseminated through scientific peer-reviewed journals and be provided to the public, including radiation workers, via the study website (http://www.rhs.kr/) and onsite radiation safety education.

Background: In Australia, clinical trial drugs are conventionally dispensed through clinical trial pharmacies only, while community pharmacies dispense drugs approved by Australia’s regulatory body. A large HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis study aimed to deliver clinical trial drug through community pharmacies to improve convenience and mimic real world prescribing. This paper describes the process of making community trials compliant with good clinical practice and reports outcomes of delivering clinical trial drug through community pharmacies. Methods: Eight community and four clinical trial pharmacies across three Australian states were approached to participate. A good clinical practice checklist was generated and pharmacies underwent a number of changes to meet clinical trial pharmacy requirements prior to study opening. Changes were made to community pharmacies to make them compliant with good clinical trial practice including; staff training, structural changes, and implementing monitoring of study drug and prescribing practices. Study drug was ordered through standard clinical trial processes and dispensed from study pharmacies by accredited pharmacists. Throughout the trial, record logs for training, prescriber signature and delegation, temperature, participant, and drug accountability were maintained at each pharmacy. The study team monitored each log and delivered on-site training to correct protocol variations. Results: Each pharmacy that was approached agreed to participate. All community pharmacies achieved good clinical practice compliance prior to dispensing study drug. Over the course of the study, 20,152 dispensations of study drug occurred, 83% of these occurred at community pharmacies. Only 2.0% of dispensations had an error, and errors were predominantly minor. On five occasions a pharmacist who was not accredited dispensed study drug. Conclusions: Community based pharmacies can undergo training and modifications to achieve good clinical practice compliance and dispense clinical trial study drug. Community based pharmacies recorded few variations from study protocol. Community based pharmacies offer a useful alternative to clinical trial pharmacies to increase convenience for study participants and expanded use of these pharmacies should be considered for large clinical trials, including HIV prevention trials.

No abstract