47

HEMATOLOGIC OBSERVATIONS

Table 4.1.—Hematological Results, Marshallese Control Groups
| No. or [NprvipuaLs

<5
5-10

|

1-15

21-30

>50

14
4

‘

9
4

2

|

NECTROPEE

LYMPHOCYTE

{

13.91281122 88/43 48/64 40/44
118 066128 93755 39/66 $255.1

4] cee

eee

eee

veeeee

cle fee

eee

[eee

(10.8 8.

2.6 9.3 | 3$10646/56

|

PLATELET

6.0150
52/43

3.8/3.4 B34}

| 27.6 43.3

7092.8 48.4987, 429.382

17

10

7

8.9106:

asiaa

§.8)43

5643.8 4.2/3.3

3.7

4

9

|

2

4

7.9903) 4441290138

47/76

79/33

4.1562

4.4

3°12

|

3

7.5

4.7)

3.0/3.6

to] 37

3.6 21.3 35.4

0

4

7

2

3

|

i

04°

9110.2

89

381

7.9

03) 4.9

51)

46

\

49 46/3.5

comparable data were not available.

Total leukocyte, neutrophile, lymphocyte,
monocyte, platelet and eosinophile counts for
the several exposure groups are given by day,

by sex and age in Tables 4.2 to 4.5. The total

white count, neutrophile, lymphoctyte and
platelet counts at the times of maximum depression (averaged over the time during which
counts were consistently the lowest) are shown
in Tables 4.6 and 4.7 for each individual in
Groups I and II respectively. Hematocrits for
ull exposure groups are shown in Table 4.8.
Hematological findings as a function of time
and age are shownalso in Figures 4.1 to 4.8.
The cumulative distribution curves for the
various exposure groups, using the average of
counts obtained over the period of maximum
depression (days 39 to 51 for leukocytes; days
26 to 30 for platelets) are shown in Figures 4.9
to 4.12.* In the figures emphasis is placed on
the separate blood elements rather than on the
total lenkocyte count, since the componentelements have distinct and different time trends
after irradiation.
*In Group [V the cumulative distribution curve for
platelet counts only is presented since hematoloical
determinations in this group were not made during the
day period, used for leukocyte comparisons

among the other groups.

4.31

seeeee

24.5 33.7 42.0 423! 38.0 39.2

cece

8

7.5

|

28.0 38,3

3

5

creel

HEMATOCRIT

:
{
Grove Bi Grour A i Grou? B
M F
| M
F i M
F

'

ene | cone

32)47

1

4.3 | 42.2 35.9 | 35.0 31.7 | 38.5 37.4 35.9 37.8
39) 39.7 38.7 | 35.0 36.2) 41,2 39.2 | 38.5 37.7

593,

sex dependency of these endpoints are comparable to that in published data (9.10), with
the exception of the platelets, on which previous

39 ta OT

|

i
Group BiGroue A\Gnour, Biogoer AlGaovr BI Grove A
M
F | M F | M
|
F | M F | M
F

|

7
6

fee fee eee

16-20

41-53)

10
6

13]

(1-20

31~40

WBC

1
Grour_A:Grour BI Grove A
M F | M
FIM
F

eee eee

|

eeeeeee

23.6 34.2 | 25.4 29.3 | 46.938.9! 46.2405

25.0 30.2 | 28.5 30.01 47.2 4.2 | 46.0 425

£21526 3.9, 3.2322

|

cae 1

!

27.4 3.5! 42.3 41.8 { 44.1 42.0

25.3 27.6 | 43.7 41.7 | 40,6 41.0

‘

Hematological Findings, Group I. Rongelap

The absolute neutrophile count of both the
younger and older age groups fell during the
second week to x value approximately 70 to 80
percent of that of the controls (see Fig. 4.1).

NEUTROPHILES » 10°

AG
AcE

POST EXPOSURE O«Y

Fictre 4.1.—Seriai changes in ncutrophile counta af
Group [ (Rongelap) for those less than 5 years and
greater than 3 ycars of age.

Following the depression of the total neutrophile count during the 2nd week, the values
were tnstable until the 5th week. At this time
the beginning of a second drop (p<0.01) was
noted for both age groups, and a low value of
approximately 50) percent of controls was

Select target paragraph3