Fukushima Thyroid Examination December 2018: 166 Surgically Confirmed as Thyroid Cancer Among 207 Cytology Suspected Cases

*Table for the latest overall results including "unreported" cases was replaced with a corrected version showing that Age 25 Milestone Examination was conducted in FY2017, not FY2016 as stated in the original version.

♦Note: This post is likely to be updated with key points from the meeting in the near future.
♦The February 21, 2019 update begins below the embedded file, "The Status of the Thyroid Ultrasound Examination."
♦On April 9, 2019, links to the third round, fourth round, and Age 25 screening reports in Japanese were replaced with links to English versions.


For more detailed information on the Fukushima Thyroid Examination itself, see the September 2017 fact sheet (long version, or e-published PDF)

Highlights: 
  • The third round: 3 cases newly diagnosed as suspicious or malignant, and 2 new cases surgically confirmed.
  • The fourth round: No cytology conducted yet as of September 30, 2018.
  • Age 25 Milestone Screening for those born in FY1992: 2 cases diagnosed as suspicious or malignant. No surgery yet.
  • Total number of suspected/confirmed thyroid cancer is now 206 (excluding a single case of benign tumor; 115 in the first round, 71 in the second round, 18 in the third round, and 2 in Age 25 Milestone Screening).
  • Total number of surgically confirmed thyroid cancer cases has increased by 2 to 166 (101 in the first round, 52 in the second round, and 13 in the third round).
The latest overall results including "unreported" cases:
(See this post for the details of the "unreported" cases.)

On December 27, 2018, the 33rd Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey (FHMS) convened in Fukushima City, Fukushima Prefecture. Among other information, the Oversight Committee released the latest results (as of September 30, 2018) of Thyroid Ultrasound Examination (TUE) including the third and fourth rounds as well as the Age 25 Milestone Screening for those born in FY1992. Official English translation will be available here in the near future. (Note on April 9, 2019: Official English translation was finally posted here on April 5, 2019.) 

A five-page summary of the first through third rounds, "The Status of the Thyroid Ultrasound Examination," was also released, listing key findings from the primary and confirmatory examinations as well as the surgical information. In particular, any update to the number of surgical cases is reflected in this summary before such information is compiled in the fiscal year update as of March 31. This summary is not translated into English officially, but here's an unofficial translation. 

 
Updated on February 20, 2019
Other topics covered at this Oversight Committee meeting include:
  1. Publication report of a paper in Scientific Reports.
  2. A report from the Eleventh session of the Thyroid Examination Assessment Subcommittee held on October 29, 2018.
  3. Recommendations by the IARC Expert Group on Thyroid Monitoring after Nuclear Accidents (TM-NUC). (See this post on what TM-NUC is all about.) 
  4. A compilation of surgical and pathological features of 125 thyroid cancer cases.
  5. A revision of the TUE support project provisions.
1. Publication report of a paper in Scientific Reports

   An FMU official reported publication of a paper, "Spatial analysis of the geographical distribution of thyroid cancer cases from the first-round thyroid ultrasound examination in Fukushima Prefecture." (link)  The paper concluded that the thyroid cancer cases detected in the first round are unlikely to be attributable to regional factors, including radiation exposure due to the Fukushima nuclear accident.

2. A report from the Eleventh session of the Thyroid Examination Assessment Subcommittee 

   The subcommittee chair, Gen Suzuki, went over the report including the materials handed out at the October 2018 subcommittee meeting as well as previous meetings. The report (only in Japanese) can be accessed here. (The list of the materials handed out at the subcommittee meeting is available here, and the detailed summary of this subcommittee meeting is included in pages 6-16 of the Japanese article e-published on the Kagaku website.)
   Analyses conducted by FMU on the second round results only include data from those who participated in both the first and the second rounds, consisting of analyses by age groups, regions, the first round results, and the length of time elapsed since the first round screening (aka screening interval). The detection rates of suspected/confirmed thyroid cancer increased with age and the length of screening interval. The screening interval was naturally the longest in the evacuation area and the shortest in Aizu, corresponding to the order of screening in the first round. When the detection rates of "B" test result and suspected/confirmed cancer in the second round were split up by the screening year of the first round (Table 4 on page ①-8 of the report), FY 2011 showed the lowest percentage of the first round "B" among the second round "B" at 19.5%. This was related to the low detection rate of "B" and "C' among the FY 2011 participants in the first round, which in turn was attributed to a unique circumstance of initial chaos and lack of examiners under which the FY 2011 was conducted. 
   Some of the subcommittee members cautioned that interpretation of apparent regional differences in cancer detection rates as dose response must take into consideration regional differences in factors such as participation rates, screening interval, circumstances and results of the first round, and FNAC rates. 
   According to FMU, these analyses were intended to offer to the Subcommittee some materials for reviewing the second round data. This appeared to be an attempt to fulfill the request from the subcommittee members to make data available in actual numbers rather than just percentages in FMU's partial analysis of some of the first and second round data (available only in Japanese here and also included in the report from the 11th subcommittee meeting) released at the 10th subcommittee meeting on July 8, 2018 (described in this post). However, this attempt was still clearly inadequate: Kota Katanoda from the National Cancer Center Japan requested more detailed distribution of tumor diameter in order to evaluate differences in detection rates by the screening year. 
   Subcommittee Chair Suzuki announced that thyroid doses by municipality and age group estimated by UNSCEAR will be used to conduct an analysis of the second round data. Katanoda warned that results from such an analysis should be interpreted with caution due to unadjustable confounders. Suzuki also revealed his intention to eventually shift from a cross-sectional ecological study currently conducted to case control studies in a cohort that has some degree of post-accidental dietary and behavior record (to be used to reconstruct individual thyroid doses).
   Regarding the TUE conducted in a school setting (herein, school screening), it was revealed to have been requested by municipalities and municipal boards of education in order to ensure equal opportunities for participation, lessen families' burden in taking children to the designated TUE facilities, and prevent absence from classes. 

   After Suzuki's reporting on the 11th subcommittee meeting, several points were raised by the oversight committee members. Shoichiro Tsugane from the National Cancer Center Japan remarked that conducting analyses by adjusting for biases and confounding factors is easier said than done. He continued to point out that detection biases were so strong that adjusting any dose response which might be shown for the biases by statistical modeling could be impossible. Noboru Takamura from Nagasaki University brought up uncertainties associated with the UNSCEAR thyroid doses.
   Toru Takano of Osaka University, who is also a subcommittee member (he is the only dual member) and a vocal opponent of the school screening, explained that, in accordance with the Declarations of Helsinki, the adverse effects of the TUE warrant that the school screening be not compulsory. When asked to describe the adverse effects of the TUE, Takano gave examples of psychological distress, commonly experienced by cancer patients, voiced by some patients that have come to see him. Kanae Narui, a clinical psychologist, responded to Takano that such distress was anticipated even before the TUE started, and it is something that can be clinically dealt with psychological care, not something that should be used as a reason to stop the TUE or the school screening. 

Table 1: Detection rates of suspected/confirmed thyroid cancer in the second round by age group

Table 3: Detection rates of suspected/confirmed thyroid cancer in the second round by region

Table 4: Detection rates of suspected/confirmed thyroid cancer in the second round by screening year for the primary examination in the first round


3. Recommendations by the IARC Expert Group on Thyroid Monitoring after Nuclear Accidents (TM-NUC)
   
   An official from Ministry of the Environment (MOE) presented a Japanese translation of the TM-NUC recommendations, which is actually a translation of an article published in the Lancet Oncology, "Long-term strategies for thyroid health monitoring after nuclear accidents: recommendations from an Expert Group convened by IARC." Translation had been commissioned to the Nuclear Safety Research Association (NSRA), along with some clerical work, by the MOE which fully financed this "project." (Read more on the "birth" of the TM-NUC project in this post.) The entire report, "Thyroid health monitoring after nuclear accidents," issued as "IARC Technical Publication 46" can be accessed from the TM-NUC website or the IARC website (or from this PDF link.) For clarification, the TM-NUC recommendations are not meant to be applied to the TUE already undergoing in Fukushima. 
   As described in this summary, the IARC Expert Group recommends against population thyroid screening, defined as actively recruiting all residents of a defined area to participate in thyroid examinations and subsequent diagnostic or follow-up tests as indicated. The Expert Group recommends a long-term thyroid monitoring program in higher-risk individuals. A thyroid monitoring program is defined as an elective activity including education to improve health literacy, registration of participants, and centralized data collection from thyroid examinations and clinical management. Higher-risk individuals are defined as individuals who received a thyroid dose of 100-500 mGy in utero, childhood, or adolescence. Note that screening is distinguished from monitoring. The recommendations do not preclude lower-risk individuals with lower doses from participating in the monitoring program after fully informed of pros and cons of thyroid examinations.

   Despite the clarification that the TM-NUC recommendations are not meant to evaluate Fukushima's TUE, Tsugane remarked that the recommendations were formed after discussions were carried out by the experts who "learned and understood all that has happened in Fukushima's TUE," and that the considerations included thyroid cancer screening in children and adolescents. The rest of his remarks about high survival rates of childhood thyroid cancer and harms of screening on asymptomatic individuals concluding with a plea to the committee members to "think hard" about the TUE on Fukushima children made it sound as if Tsugane was suggesting the TUE conform to the TM-NUC recommendations.
   However, there are major differences in thyroid cancer management between Japan and western countries that make make reliance on data from western studies tricky. For instance, hemithyroidectomy is the surgical method of choice in Japan for preservation of natural thyroid function unless total thyroidectomy is absolutely called for, and almost all cases undergo extensive lymph node dissection. Whereas in the US, total thyroidectomy and radioiodine treatment is considered the mainstream management, which might lead to high survival rates, but QOL (quality of life) might suffer from lifetime thyroid hormone supplementation as well as side effects of radiation treatment including an increased risk of secondary cancer.
   Use of survival rates as the end point (i.e., as in conventional cancer screening) has been a point of contention during both the oversight committee and the subcommittee meetings, with some members (esp. Takano and Tomotaka Sobue, both of Osaka University) calling Fukushima's thyroid cancer cases "overdiagnosis" and even recommending a switch of diagnostic modalities from ultrasound to palpation based on a high survival rate even when diagnosed after symptoms appear. 
   Other members, including a thyroid surgeon, a pediatrician and a pathologist, have cautioned against relying on survival rates and placed importance on high QOL achieved by early diagnosis and treatment. It was also explained that, given the fact that the TUE was started against the backdrop of the Fukushima nuclear accident, the TUE should not be considered as a conventional cancer screening but as a health examination to assess potential effects of radiation exposure. (Note: This was also stated by Shinichi Suzuki, a thyroid surgeon at FMU, at the 2nd subcommittee meeting in 2014. In Japanese, "cancer screening" and "health examination" are both called "ken-shin" but use different kanji characters for "ken.")
   Another issue with Tsugane's remark about how the experts "learned and understood all that has happened in Fukushima's TUE" is that the information about Fukushima's TUE included in the TM-NUC report appears to be mostly limited to the official TUE results that have been released publicly. Lack of transparency has always been an issue with the TUE data, but we now know the official data does not include any cancer cases diagnosed during clinical follow-up ("unreported cases") or undergoing surgery at non-FMU medical facilities. Thus, TM-NUC could not have "learned and understood all that has happened in Fukushima's TUE," as recognized by Tsugane. (This "recognition" by Tsugane was strange, considering Tsugane's criticism when the existence of the "unreported cases" was revealed. Tsugane stated that any paper written excluding the "unreported cases" would not be able to be accepted by journals as international or scientific paper and that it was scientifically expected for cancer screening data to include all cases diagnosed during a given period.)
   Further, review of some of the academic papers used by TM-NUC as references on the TUE also reveals their conclusions of denying radiation effects are mostly based on analyses of the first round data. This "denial" has to be considered too premature, given the second round data have yet to undergone analyses for potential dose response.

4. A compilation of surgical and pathological features of 125 thyroid cancer cases

   This handout titled "Regarding surgical cases at Fukushima Medical University hospital" is a compilation of clinical information already released and included in the following four references:
   Basically, there is no new information in this report that hasn't been released up to now. It's that all the clinical and pathological information released so far—albeit limited—is complied in one handout with an additional information about TNM and Ex classifications and an anatomical classification of regional lymph nodes as designated in the seventh edition of the Thyroid Cancer Management Guidelines. Chairman Hoshi commented that this report was put together to address repeated requests by the committee member Fumiko Kasuga of the National Institute of Environmental Studies. Kasuga politely thanked for the report, apparently without realizing it does not contain what she has been asking for: an additional set of information such as a more detailed distribution of tumor diameters.
   More information about inconsistencies of the second and third references will be added at the end of the current post.

5. A revision of the TUE support program provisions

   As explained in the July 2018 post, the TUE support program offers reimbursement for out-of-pocket medical expenses (30% copay) incurred while undergoing follow-up observation or medical treatment for thyroid nodules diagnosed during the TUE. The revision, effective December 12, 2018, retroactively removes one of the previous eligibility criteria requiring participation in the confirmatory examination of the TUE at the FMU-authorized medical facilities. This revision, explained in this handout and read aloud by Yoichi Suzuki, chief of prefectural department of Fukushima Health Management Survey, was called for in order to expand eligibility to those receiving medical care outside FMU or FMU-authorized facilities for various reasons. As laid out on the Fukushima Prefecture website, the revised eligibility criteria are as simple as 1) participation in the TUE and 2) receiving medical care for thyroid nodular lesion(s) at medical facilities. The criterion 1) can even be waived under compelling circumstances such as evacuation. 
   The TUE support program offers financial support in exchange for some clinical information. The revision also calls for an additional collection of clinical information, such as the presence of distant metastasis, which is necessary for continuous support.
   In Fukushima Prefecture, children aged 18 or younger receive free medical care until the end of fiscal year when they turn 18. The TUE support program excludes those receiving free medical care from Fukushima Prefecture or those on welfare. There are also municipal and prefectural medical expense assistance programs with various coverage and age limits throughout Japan, so those who moved out of Fukushima Prefecture receiving such assistance will not qualify for the TUE support program, either.
  
   There were questions from the committee members regarding the actual number of thyroid cancer cases in relation to the statement made by Suzuki to the December 13, 2018 Fukushima Prefectural Assembly. Suzuki stated that all 233 receiving payments from the TUE support program had thyroid cancer, whereas it had previously been reported that 233 received payments including 82 that underwent surgery and 77 of 82 were confirmed with thyroid cancer. This discrepancy caused a confusion, leading some to criticize "underreporting." Suzuki never said his statement at the prefectural assembly was incorrect, but he did clarify that there were indeed 77 cancer cases.
      


Fukushima Thyroid Examination September 2018: 164 Surgically Confirmed as Thyroid Cancer Among 201 Cytology Suspected Cases


For more detailed information on the Fukushima Thyroid Examination itself, see the September 2017 fact sheet (long version, or e-published PDF)

Highlights: 
  • The third round: 3 cases newly diagnosed as suspicious or malignant, and 2 new  cases surgically confirmed.
  • The fourth round began on April 1, 2018.
  • Total number of suspected/confirmed thyroid cancer is now 201 (excluding a single case of benign tumor; 115 in the first round, 71 in the second round, and 15 in the third round).
  • Total number of surgically confirmed thyroid cancer cases has increased by 2 to 164 (101 in the first round, 52 in the second round, and 11 in the third round)
The latest overall results:
(Scroll down for the latest results including the "unreported" cases explained in this post.)

On September 5, 2018, the 32nd Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey (FHMS) convened in Fukushima City, Fukushima Prefecture. Among other information, the Oversight Committee released the latest results (as of June 30, 2018) of the third and fourth rounds of the Thyroid Ultrasound Examination (TUE). 

A four-page summary of the first through third rounds, "The Status of the Thyroid Ultrasound Examination," was also released, listing key findings from the primary and confirmatory examinations as well as the surgical information. In particular, any update to the number of surgical cases is reflected in this summary before such information is compiled in the fiscal year update as of March 31. This summary is not translated into English officially, but here's an unofficial translation. 



Key points from the Oversight Committee:

Target population shrinks
For the fourth round to be conducted during FY2018-2019, the target population excludes about 44,000 individuals total (22,000 each from FY2018 and FY2019) as those born in FY1993 and FY1994 will shift to the Age 25 Milestone Screening in FY2018 and FY2019, respectively).

The first Age 25 Milestone Screening results for those born in FY1992 were released at the last Oversight Committee meeting on June 18, 2018. Only 1,902 out of 22,653 participated at a strikingly low participation rate of 8.4%. It should be noted that with each successive round of screening, more and more individuals reaching age 25 will be removed from the main dataset. So far no thyroid cancer has been diagnosed in the Milestone Screening cohort, but any cancer case from this cohort will not be reflected in the age distribution graphs of the main dataset. 

For each round, there are two such graphs: one for age-at-exposure as of March 11, 2011 and the other for age-at-examination. Because thyroid cancer incidence naturally increases with age, one would expect a growing trend towards the right in the age distribution graph. The second round age-at-exposure graph, before the Age 25 Milestone Screening began, lacks this trend and falls to the right, most likely due to a lower participating rate beyond the high school age. The third round age-at-exposure graph completely deviates from an expected pattern, mostly blank in higher ages saving 2 cases at age-at-exposure of 16 years. This likely reflects even a lower participation rate after high school graduation, in addition to the exclusion of those eligible for the Age 25 Milestone Screening. An appearance of no cancer cases for higher ages might simply be an artifact due to exclusion of individuals reaching age 25.

Participation rates
The primary examination participation rates have been declining with each successive round of the TUE: 81.7% for the first round, 71.0% for the second round, and 64.3% for the third round. In particular, a participation rate for age 18 or older (age at examination) has gone from already low 25.7% in the second round to even lower 15.9% in the third round.  

Participation rates for the confirmatory examination have also been declining from 92.9% in the first round, 84.1% in the second round, and 58.7% in the third round which is still ongoing.

Correction of the number of surgeries conducted outside FMU
At this committee meeting, a discrepancy in the number of surgical cases at medical facilities other than FMU (refereed to as "non-FMU surgical cases" herein) was resolved.

So far clinicopathological information on surgical cases have been released three times: as a document called "Regarding Surgical Indicated Cases" in November 2014 (at the 4th Thyroid Examination Assessment Subcommittee) and August 2015 (at the 20th Oversight Committee); and presented at an international symposium in September 2016. (Note
the 2016 information was later reported as "Regarding Surgical Indicated Cases" at the 8th Thyroid Examination Assessment Subcommittee in November 2017. This means and no new clinical information has been reported to the Oversight Committee since 2016.) 

Information released so far shows the number of surgeries conducted at non-FMU facilities as 3, 7, and 6 in 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively. It is easy to see the number increased from 3 to 7 from 2014 to 2015 as the number of surgical cases increased. However a drop from 7 to 6 has been a mystery. 

A closer look at the 2016 number shows that there were 132 surgical cases between August 2012 and March 2016 (see Slide 1 in this post). Of 132, 126 surgeries were conducted at FMU, and one was diagnosed benign and 125 malignant. Non-FMU surgical cases are shown as 6. However, it turns out that 126 surgical cases included one case operated on in April 2016. The TUE data is compiled fiscally, with the end of a fiscal year being March 31 of the following calendar year. Thus, strictly speaking, 125 of 132 surgeries as of March 31, 2016 were conducted at FMU resulting in one benign and 124 malignant cases, leaving non-FMU surgical cases at 7, not 6 as previously reported. 

However, this creates another discrepancy because Slide 2 of this post discusses "Characteristics of 125 thyroid cancers at Fukushima Medical University", not 124. This was resolved in the correction report (only in Japanese) which explained that the clinicopathological details given on 125 FMU surgical cases includes the April 2016 case.
   
Non-FMU surgical cases have not been kept track of
In relation to the above corrections, Hiroki Shimura, head of the TUE program, revealed that FMU has not kept track of non-FMU surgical cases beyond the 7 cases already reported. Shimura explained that the surgical information as clinical information is outside the scope of the TUE, but it has been reported out of courtesy. However, FMU began to report the number of surgical cases on the last page of the report, separately from the rest of the results such as cytology results at the 19th Oversight Committee in May 2015. Up to this point, surgical information was included in the cytology results section. Their intention appears to be to clarify what belongs to the TUE itself. 

Shimura further explained that during the first round and part of the second round (probably through March 2016), non-FMU surgical cases were included in the number of surgeries reported to the Oversight Committee. However, beyond 7 non-FMU surgical cases already reported, FMU has not attempted or does not intend to kept track of non-surgical cases. 

The reason given by Shimura has to do with FMU's decision to tighten how clinical information is obtained and released, reflecting "changes in how the society views research ethics and patient privacy protection." Shimura elaborated that FMU has been careful about whether or not to obtain clinical information from other medical facilities, giving a special consideration to release of information that might reveal patient identity and to appropriate ethics review. In regard to obtaining non-FMU surgical data, Shimura cites a potential difficulty in  confirming authenticity of such data as well as a lack of actual mechanism to  follow patients outside the FMU system.

This revelation was a surprise. FMU has no idea if and how many surgeries might be conducted outside FMU including medical facilities contracted to participate in the TUE. Not all medical facilities contracted to conduct the primary and confirmatory examinations may offer surgeries, but they already have a line of communication established with FMU in order to send the raw data. Rather than trying everything possible to gather all the data available, FMU appears to be making excuses not to add to their dataset.

This revelation also brings a doubt on accuracy of the number of cases suspected of thyroid cancer which have not undergone surgery. There are 37 such cases as of June 30, 2018: 14 from the first round, 19 from the second round, and 4 from the third round. It is possible that these 37 cases are simply being followed up regularly without needing any surgery, but it is also plausible that some, especially from the first and second rounds which have been followed up quite some time, might have already undergone surgery outside FMU.


Reluctance on releasing detailed data
There have been repeated requests to FMU from multiple committee members to release more detailed data. Fumiko Kasuga, a committee member from the National Institute of Health Sciences, again asked for a more detailed breakdown of tumor sizes in cancer patients and reiterated that information gained from the TUE belongs to Fukushima residents and that any data should be shared with the residents in an easy-to-understand manner. 

However, detailed data are often presented at academic meetings or released in academic publications first, without ever being reported to the Oversight Committee. Clinical details of surgical cases are one such example: no new data beyond the 132 surgical cases as of March 2016 has been reported to the Oversight Committee or the Subcommittee, while more recent data on 153 surgical cases (including 145 FMU cases) as of March 2017 were presented at the Japan Thyroid Association meeting in October 2017. As shown in the abstract below, it appears that the same data are to be presented at the poster session during the 88th Annual Meeting of the American Thyroid Association in October 3-7, 2018. (Abstracts can be seen here.)


  
Furthermore, FMU's partial analysis of some of the first and second round data (available only in Japanese here) released at the 10th Thyroid Examination Assessment Subcommittee meeting on July 8, 2018 met a near unanimous request from the subcommittee members to make data available in actual numbers rather than just percentages (the minutes of the proceedings are available here in Japanese). At the time, FMU officials asserted as before that detailed information were not to be released for the protection of patient privacy. 

Shimura also explained that a more detailed analysis considering various biases could breakdown the data into very small sample sizes, such as one or two cases, potentially revealing their identity. Some subcommittee members emphasized the need for seeing actual data in order to begin some type of analysis. FMU officials expressed their willingness to share actual data with subcommittee members in a closed meeting, especially with those specializing in epidemiology.

During this Oversight Committee meeting, Tamami Umeda, a committee member representing the Ministry of the Environment stressed an importance of sharing data with transparency. Umeda also repeated her previous request to integrate all the data available, including data from the TUE support program and the unreported cases clinically and surgically managed at FMU (see the post on the previous Oversight Committee meeting here). Kasuga also made a similar request.

The latest overall results including "unreported" cases
Here's the latest results including unreported cases. It should be kept in mind that even this table is far from being comprehensive: the TUE support program data isn't detailed enough to be included in this format, and there are surgical cases from other medical facilities completely outside the framework of the TUE. (The italicized part was added on October 2, 2018)



********************
The first round results (no change from the previous report)
From the FY 2016 supplemental report with data as of March 31, 2017. (Summary report with data as of March 31, 2018, only shows the total results, not by fiscal year cohorts. However, for the content shown below, information remained the same between 2017 and 2018.)


The second round results 
No change since the March 5, 2018 Oversight Committee meeting.


The third round results
Three new suspicious/malignant cases were diagnosed, all from the FY 2017 cohort: two females (ages 10 and 11 in March 2011) and 1 male (age 9 in March 2011). One resides in a Hama-dori municipality, and the other two in the Aizu region. All three were assessed "B" in the second round.



Fukushima Thyroid Examination August 2024: 284 Surgically Confirmed as Thyroid Cancer Among 338 Cytology Suspected Cases

Overview      On August 2, 2024,  t he 52nd session of the Oversight Committee  for the  Fukushima Health Management Survey  (FHMS) convened...