Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Radiat Res ; 199(6): 535-555, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37310880

ABSTRACT

Tools for radiation exposure reconstruction are required to support the medical management of radiation victims in radiological or nuclear incidents. Different biological and physical dosimetry assays can be used for various exposure scenarios to estimate the dose of ionizing radiation a person has absorbed. Regular validation of the techniques through inter-laboratory comparisons (ILC) is essential to guarantee high quality results. In the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison, the performance quality of established cytogenetic assays [dicentric chromosome assay (DCA), cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN), stable chromosomal translocation assay (FISH) and premature chromosome condensation assay (PCC)] was tested in comparison to molecular biological assays [gamma-H2AX foci (gH2AX), gene expression (GE)] and physical dosimetry-based assays [electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), optically or thermally stimulated luminescence (LUM)]. Three blinded coded samples (e.g., blood, enamel or mobiles) were exposed to 0, 1.2 or 3.5 Gy X-ray reference doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min). These doses roughly correspond to clinically relevant groups of unexposed to low exposed (0-1 Gy), moderately exposed (1-2 Gy, no severe acute health effects expected) and highly exposed individuals (>2 Gy, requiring early intensive medical care). In the frame of the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison, samples were sent to 86 specialized teams in 46 organizations from 27 nations for dose estimation and identification of three clinically relevant groups. The time for sending early crude reports and more precise reports was documented for each laboratory and assay where possible. The quality of dose estimates was analyzed with three different levels of granularity, 1. by calculating the frequency of correctly reported clinically relevant dose categories, 2. by determining the number of dose estimates within the uncertainty intervals recommended for triage dosimetry (±0.5 Gy or ±1.0 Gy for doses <2.5 Gy or >2.5 Gy), and 3. by calculating the absolute difference (AD) of estimated doses relative to the reference doses. In total, 554 dose estimates were submitted within the 6-week period given before the exercise was closed. For samples processed with the highest priority, earliest dose estimates/categories were reported within 5-10 h of receipt for GE, gH2AX, LUM, EPR, 2-3 days for DCA, CBMN and within 6-7 days for the FISH assay. For the unirradiated control sample, the categorization in the correct clinically relevant group (0-1 Gy) as well as the allocation to the triage uncertainty interval was, with the exception of a few outliers, successfully performed for all assays. For the 3.5 Gy sample the percentage of correct classifications to the clinically relevant group (≥2 Gy) was between 89-100% for all assays, with the exception of gH2AX. For the 1.2 Gy sample, an exact allocation to the clinically relevant group was more difficult and 0-50% or 0-48% of the estimates were wrongly classified into the lowest or highest dose categories, respectively. For the irradiated samples, the correct allocation to the triage uncertainty intervals varied considerably between assays for the 1.2 Gy (29-76%) and 3.5 Gy (17-100%) samples. While a systematic shift towards higher doses was observed for the cytogenetic-based assays, extreme outliers exceeding the reference doses 2-6 fold were observed for EPR, FISH and GE assays. These outliers were related to a particular material examined (tooth enamel for EPR assay, reported as kerma in enamel, but when converted into the proper quantity, i.e. to kerma in air, expected dose estimates could be recalculated in most cases), the level of experience of the teams (FISH) and methodological uncertainties (GE). This was the first RENEB ILC where everything, from blood sampling to irradiation and shipment of the samples, was organized and realized at the same institution, for several biological and physical retrospective dosimetry assays. Almost all assays appeared comparably applicable for the identification of unexposed and highly exposed individuals and the allocation of medical relevant groups, with the latter requiring medical support for the acute radiation scenario simulated in this exercise. However, extreme outliers or a systematic shift of dose estimates have been observed for some assays. Possible reasons will be discussed in the assay specific papers of this special issue. In summary, this ILC clearly demonstrates the need to conduct regular exercises to identify research needs, but also to identify technical problems and to optimize the design of future ILCs.


Subject(s)
Biological Assay , Blood Specimen Collection , Retrospective Studies , Cytokinesis , Electron Spin Resonance Spectroscopy
2.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 164(1-2): 42-5, 2015 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25205835

ABSTRACT

Creating a sustainable network in biological and retrospective dosimetry that involves a large number of experienced laboratories throughout the European Union (EU) will significantly improve the accident and emergency response capabilities in case of a large-scale radiological emergency. A well-organised cooperative action involving EU laboratories will offer the best chance for fast and trustworthy dose assessments that are urgently needed in an emergency situation. To this end, the EC supports the establishment of a European network in biological dosimetry (RENEB). The RENEB project started in January 2012 involving cooperation of 23 organisations from 16 European countries. The purpose of RENEB is to increase the biodosimetry capacities in case of large-scale radiological emergency scenarios. The progress of the project since its inception is presented, comprising the consolidation process of the network with its operational platform, intercomparison exercises, training activities, proceedings in quality assurance and horizon scanning for new methods and partners. Additionally, the benefit of the network for the radiation research community as a whole is addressed.


Subject(s)
Biological Assay/methods , Disaster Planning/organization & administration , Radiation Injuries/prevention & control , Radiation Monitoring/methods , Radiation Protection/methods , Radioactive Hazard Release/prevention & control , Emergencies , Europe , Humans , Radiation Exposure/prevention & control , Safety Management/organization & administration
3.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 151(4): 621-5, 2012 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22923244

ABSTRACT

In Europe, a network for biological dosimetry has been created to strengthen the emergency preparedness and response capabilities in case of a large-scale nuclear accident or radiological emergency. Through the RENEB (Realising the European Network of Biodosimetry) project, 23 experienced laboratories from 16 European countries will establish a sustainable network for rapid, comprehensive and standardised biodosimetry provision that would be urgently required in an emergency situation on European ground. The foundation of the network is formed by five main pillars: (1) the ad hoc operational basis, (2) a basis of future developments, (3) an effective quality-management system, (4) arrangements to guarantee long-term sustainability and (5) awareness of the existence of RENEB. RENEB will thus provide a mechanism for quick, efficient and reliable support within the European radiation emergency management. The scientific basis of RENEB will concurrently contribute to increased safety in the field of radiation protection.


Subject(s)
Radiation Protection , Radioactive Hazard Release , Civil Defense , Emergencies , Europe , Humans , Radioactive Hazard Release/prevention & control
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...