Some CT scans may have too much radiation, researchers say
Rebecca Smith-Bindman, a professor at the University of California-San Francisco medical school, has spent well over a decade researching the disquieting risk that one of modern medicine's most valuable tools, computerized tomography scans, can sometimes cause cancer.
Smith-Bindman and like-minded colleagues have long pushed for federal policies aimed at improving safety for patients undergoing CT scans. Under new Medicare regulations effective this year, hospitals and imaging centers must start collecting and sharing more information about the radiation their scanners emit.
About 93 million CT scans are performed every year in the United States, according to IMV, a medical market research company that tracks imaging. More than half of those scans are for people 60 and older. Yet there is scant regulation of radiation levels as the machines scan organs and structures inside bodies. Dosages are erratic, varying widely from one clinic to another, and are too often unnecessarily high, Smith-Bindman and other critics say.
'It's unfathomable,' Smith-Bindman said. 'We keep doing more and more CTs, and the doses keep going up.'
One CT scan can expose a patient to 10 or 15 times as much radiation as another, Smith-Bindman said. 'There is very large variation,' she said, 'and the doses vary by an order of magnitude — tenfold, not 10% different — for patients seen for the same clinical problem.' In outlier institutions, the variation is even higher, according to research she and a team of international collaborators have published.
She and other researchers estimated in 2009 that high doses could be responsible for 2% of cancers. Ongoing research shows it's probably higher, since far more scans are performed today.
The cancer risk from CT scans for any individual patient is very low, although it rises for patients who have numerous scans throughout their lives. Radiologists don't want to scare off patients who can benefit from imaging, which plays a crucial role in identifying life-threatening conditions like cancers and aneurysms and guides doctors through complicated procedures.
But the new data collection rules from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued in the closing months of the Biden administration are aimed at making imaging safer. They also require a more careful assessment of the dosing, quality, and necessity of CT scans.
The requirements, rolled out in January, are being phased in over about three years for hospitals, outpatient settings, and physicians. Under the complicated reporting system, not every radiologist or health care setting is required to comply immediately. Providers could face financial penalties under Medicare if they don't comply, though those will be phased in, too, starting in 2027.
When the Biden administration issued the new guidelines, a CMS spokesperson said in an email that excessive and unnecessary radiation exposure was a health risk that could be addressed through measurement and feedback to hospitals and physicians. The agency at the time declined to make an official available for an interview. The Trump administration did not respond to a request for comment for this article.
The Leapfrog Group, an organization that tracks hospital safety, welcomed the new rules. 'Radiation exposure is a very serious patient safety issue, so we commend CMS for focusing on CT scans,' said Leah Binder, the group's president and CEO. Leapfrog has set standards for pediatric exposure to imaging radiation, 'and we find significant variation among hospitals,' Binder added.
CMS contracted with UCSF in 2019 to research solutions aimed at encouraging better measurement and assessment of CTs, leading to the development of the agency's new approach.
The American College of Radiology and three other associations involved in medical imaging, however, objected to the draft CMS rules when they were under review, arguing in written comments in 2023 that they were excessively cumbersome, would burden providers, and could add to the cost of scans. The group was also concerned, at that time, that health providers would have to use a single, proprietary tech tool for gathering the dosing and any related scan data.
The single company in question, Alara Imaging, supplies free software that radiologists and radiology programs need to comply with the new regulations. The promise to keep it free is included in the company's copyright. Smith-Bindman is a co-founder of Alara Imaging, and UCSF also has a stake in the company, which is developing other health tech products unrelated to the CMS imaging rule that it does plan to commercialize.
But the landscape has recently changed. ACR said in a statement from Judy Burleson, ACR vice president for quality management programs, that CMS is allowing in other vendors — and that ACR itself is 'in discussion with Alara' on the data collection and submission. In addition, a company called Medisolv, which works on health care quality, said at least one client is working with another vendor, Imalogix, on the CT dose data.
Several dozen health quality and safety organizations — including some national leaders in patient safety, like the Institute of Healthcare Improvement — have supported CMS' efforts.
Concerns about CT dosing are long-standing. A landmark study published in JAMA Internal Medicine in 2009 by a research team that included experts from the National Cancer Institute, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and universities estimated that CT scans were responsible for 29,000 excess cancer cases a year in the United States, about 2% of all cases diagnosed annually.
But the number of CT scans kept climbing. By 2016, it was estimated at 74 million, up 20% in a decade, though radiologists say dosages of radiation per scan have declined. Some researchers have noted that U.S. doctors order far more imaging than physicians in other developed countries, arguing some of it is wasteful and dangerous.
More recent studies, some looking at pediatric patients and some drawing on radiation exposure data from survivors of the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, have also identified CT scan risk.
Older people may face greater cancer risks because of imaging they had earlier in life. And scientists have emphasized the need to be particularly careful with children, who may be more vulnerable to radiation exposure while young and face the consequences of cumulative exposure as they age.
Max Wintermark, a neuroradiologist at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, who has been involved in the field's work on appropriate utilization of imaging, said doctors generally follow dosing protocols for CT scans. In addition, the technology is improving; he expects artificial intelligence to soon help doctors determine optimal imaging use and dosing, delivering 'the minimum amount of radiation dose to get us to the diagnosis that we're trying to reach.'
But he said he welcomes the new CMS regulations.
'I think the measures will help accelerate the transition towards always lower and lower doses,' he said. 'They are helpful.'
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
10 hours ago
- Forbes
Republicans Like Health Savings Accounts
Should the government allow HSAs to cover gym memberships? Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are a popular and important way many people pay for medical expenses. They are also a great way to save—better, for example, than an IRA or a 401(k) plan. Because of various quirks in the law, HSAs are not available to a large number of people—including people on Medicaid or Medicare and most people who buy their own insurance in the (Obamacare) exchanges. Under the reconciliation bill just passed in the House of Representatives, more people will have access to these accounts and there will be new opportunities to use them. Currently, individuals and their employers can make tax-free deposits to HSAs, provided the individual is also covered by third-party health insurance with a high deductible. Money can accumulate and grow tax-free. After age 65, the money can be withdrawn for non-health expenses without penalty, but it is subject to normal income taxes. As of 2023, there were 37.4 million accounts with $46.4 billion in assets. Industry experts think the House bill will lead to an additional 20 million people with an HSA. Here is a summary of the hits and misses in the Republican bill, as it faces a vote by the Senate. The Good. By far the best feature of the bill is a provision making all bronze and catastrophic insurance plans offered through the (Obamacare) exchanges automatically eligible for an HSA account. This is likely the main reason why the number of HSA accounts is likely to soar. Another provision would allow the use of HSAs to pay monthly fees for direct primary care (DPC). This used to be called 'concierge care' and in the past it was available only to the rich. But the price has come way down. Atlas MD in Wichita, for example, charges $50 a month for a mother and $10 for a child. In return, the family has 24/7 access to a physician's practice that provides all primary care. Often, the family has the doctor's personal phone number. DPC has become increasingly popular, and employers often pay the monthly fee for their employees. Under current law, however, the employer cannot put funds in an HSA account, let the employee choose a DPC doctor and pay that doctor from the account. The House bill will create that opportunity. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the ten-year cost of all of the HSA changes combined is almost $44 billion. Yet the cost of the two best provisions is less than $6 billion. More on that below. The Questionable. The bill allows annual withdrawals of $500 (individuals) or $1,000 (couples) for gym memberships and other physical activities. (No sailing or golfing expenses, however.) The problem is that these are not medical expenses. If we are going to allow gym memberships, why not hundreds of other nonmedical expenses – including sailing and golfing? The CBO says the cost of this provision is $10 billion. The bill also doubles the annual HSA contribution that is allowable for individuals with incomes up to $75,000 and couples who earn up to $150,000. The problem here is that only about one in ten account holders are contributing the maximum allowable right now. At a cost of more than $8 billion this is an expensive change that will only affect a small part of the market. Instead of these questionable measures, the Senate should consider making all Obamacare silver plans (the most popular choice) automatically eligible for an HSA. Missed opportunities. While the House should be congratulated for making many desirable improvements in the HSA law, it unfortunately failed to correct a fundamental flaw: an inflexible across-the-board deductible. Common sense would suggest that different medical expenses need different deductibles. The biggest problem with chronic illness, for example, is noncompliance with a drug regimen. That is why some Medicare Advantage plans make maintenance drugs for chronic patients (such as insulin for diabetics) available for free or at very low cost. In the first Trump administration, an IRS ruling waived the deductible requirement for 14 specific services and medications that serve as treatments for such conditions as diabetes, asthma, heart disease, and depression. This was an executive branch decision to modify existing legislation, however. To make it permanent, Congress needs to codify it. Ideally, Congress should remove the deductible requirement altogether and let the role of deductibles be determined in the marketplace. One way to think about the combination of allowing gym memberships and failing to address the deductible issue is to see that the House risks being accused of creating benefits for the healthy while ignoring the sick. Another missed opportunity was the failure of House Republicans to give 80 million Medicaid enrollees access to what I will call a Roth HSA. Private companies managing Medicaid (or the state itself) should be able to make deposits to an account that would cover, say, all primary care. Enrollees could use the money for health care during an insurance year. Afterward, they could withdraw any unspent funds for any purpose. If there were no taxes or penalties on non-medical withdrawals, health care and non-health care would trade against each other on a level playing field under the tax law. People wouldn't spend a dollar on health care unless they got a dollar's worth of value. An early study by the RAND Corporation suggests that these accounts would reduce Medicaid spending by 30 percent. Aside from payments for the disabled and nursing home care, if Medicaid spending could be reduced by 30 percent, the savings would amount to almost $1 trillion over ten years. This saving would be shared by the beneficiaries and the taxpayers who fund Medicaid.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Your Brain Wrinkles Are Way More Important Than We Ever Realized
The folds and ridges of the human brain are more complex than any other in the animal kingdom, and a new study shows that this complexity may be linked to the brain's level of connectivity and our reasoning abilities. Research led by a team from the University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley) looked at the brain shapes and neural activity of 43 young people, and in particular the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) and lateral parietal cortex (LPC) – parts of the brain that handle reasoning and high-level cognition. The grooves and folds on the brain are known as sulci, with the smallest grooves known as tertiary sulci. These are the last to form as the brain grows, and the research team wanted to see how these grooves related to cognition. "The hypothesis is that the formation of sulci leads to shortened distances between connected brain regions, which could lead to increased neural efficiency, and then, in turn, individual differences in improved cognition with translational applications," says neuroscientist Kevin Weiner, from UC Berkeley. The analysis revealed each sulci had its own distinct connectivity pattern, and that the physical structure of some of these grooves was linked to the level of communication between brain areas – and not just areas that were close to each other. It adds to the findings of a 2021 study carried out by some of the same researchers, which found the depth of certain sulci are associated with cognitive reasoning. Now we have more data to help scientists understand why that might be. Between 60 and 70 percent of the brain's cortex (or outer layer) is hidden away inside folds, and these patterns change with age too. Tertiary sulci can vary significantly between individuals as well. "While sulci can change over development, getting deeper or shallower and developing thinner or thicker gray matter – probably in ways that depend on experience – our particular configuration of sulci is a stable individual difference: their size, shape, location and even, for a few sulci, whether they're present or absent," says neuroscientist Silvia Bunge, from UC Berkeley. It's clear from this research that the peaks and valleys of these brain structures are much more important than previously realized. They're not just random folds used to pack brains inside skulls – and may have evolved in certain directions over time. Going forward, the researchers have big plans when it comes to studying brain grooves. Eventually, it's possible that a map of these sulci could help in assessing brain development in children and spotting neurological disorders. There's a lot more work to do before that can happen though, and the researchers are emphasizing that brain fold length and depth are just two of many factors involved when it comes to our cognitive abilities. "Cognitive function depends on variability in a variety of anatomical and functional features," says Bunge. "Importantly, we know that experience, like quality of schooling, plays a powerful role in shaping an individual's cognitive trajectory, and that it is malleable, even in adulthood." The research has been published in the Journal of Neuroscience. Something Strange Happens to Your Eyes When You're Sexually Aroused 2-Year-Old Prodigy Joins 'High IQ' Club Mensa as Youngest Member Ever Traces of Mysterious Ancient Human Population Discovered in Colombia
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Revelation-Backed Omada Health Jumps After $150 Million IPO
(Bloomberg) -- Omada Health Inc. shares ended their debut trading day exactly where they started after the digital health-care company raised $150 million in its initial public offering. Next Stop: Rancho Cucamonga! ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract Where Public Transit Systems Are Bouncing Back Around the World US Housing Agency Vulnerable to Fraud After DOGE Cuts, Documents Warn Trump Said He Fired the National Portrait Gallery Director. She's Still There. The stock climbed 21% to close at $23 on Friday in New York — the same price it opened at — higher than its IPO price of $19 per share. The stock had jumped as much as 49% during the the trading session. The San Francisco-based company sold 7.9 million shares at $19 each after offering them at $18 to $20 apiece, according to its filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. The trading gives Omada a market value of $1.3 billion based on the number of outstanding shares listed in its filings. The IPO adds to the growing pace of US first-time share sales this year, which have raised around $24.9 billion so far, versus $17.6 billion in the same period last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Shares of health-care upstarts that went public on US exchanges this year are also up by a weighted average of roughly 18%, according to Bloomberg calculations. An IPO last month for digital physical therapy provider Hinge Health Inc. — a competitor to Omada — raised $503 million, and shares have risen about 19% since its debut. Omada's offering closed with orders for more than 15 times the shares available, with allocations going to a highly concentrated group of investors, Bloomberg News has reported. Virtual Care Founded in 2011, Omada provides virtual care in between doctor's visits to help people manage chronic conditions including diabetes and prediabetes, obesity, hypertension and musculoskeletal conditions, according to the filing. Users track metrics including weight, blood pressure and blood glucose values to the company's platform, which includes a mobile app. Unlike other digital health firms, Omada doesn't offer GLP-1 weight loss drugs, the filing shows. Instead it has programs to support people using them, including coaching and nutrition guidance, to manage muscle loss and stop the weight from returning when they cease taking the medication, according to the filing. About 50,000 of Omada's 679,000 members are on GLP-1s, co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Sean Duffy said in an interview with Bloomberg News. It's a relatively new business for the company that has expanded in the past year as part of its partnership with Cigna Group's Express Scripts unit, he said. 'For support, especially in chronic disease, it's very helpful that someone feels they are not just doing this for themselves but for someone else - to have someone rooting for you in your corner is really important for outcomes,' Duffy said. Omada is using AI to automate the virtual care it provides to chronic disease sufferers, though the services are 'human-led,' he said. 'Our members tell us they want a person and I am yet to see anyone that feels accountable to ChatGPT,' Duffy said. Omada has over 2,000 customers including employers and health systems, and more than 679,000 total members enrolled in one or more programs, according to the filing. Largest Shareholder Revelation Partners is Omada's largest shareholder, beneficially owning 10.9% of the company before the offering, according to the filing. USVP has 9.9% of the shares, Andreessen Horowitz has 9.6% and FMR has 9.3%, the filing shows. Omada was valued at more than $1 billion in a 2022 funding round led by Fidelity Management & Research Co., it said in a statement at the time. The company had a net loss of $9.4 million on revenue of close to $55 million in the first three months of 2025, compared with a net loss of nearly $19 million on revenue of $35.1 million in the same period a year earlier, the filing shows. The offering was led by Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co., the filing shows. The company's shares trade on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol OMDA. (Updates with closing prices.) Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Is Elon Musk's Political Capital Spent? Trump Considers Deporting Migrants to Rwanda After the UK Decides Not To ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.