The effect of inhibitors of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-related kinases on dibenzo[def,p]chrysene genotoxicity measured by γH2AX levels and neutral comet assay in HepG2 human hepatocellular cancer cells.

In the study the modulating effect of inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-related kinases (PIKK): ATM (Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated), ATR (Ataxia Telangiectasia and Rad3 Related) and DNA-PK (DNA-dependent protein kinase) on genotoxicity of dibenzo[def,p]chrysene (DBC) in HepG2 human hepatocellular cancer cells was investigated. The cytotoxicity of DBC was determined, also in combination with PIKK inhibitors, using the MTT reduction assay. The high cytotoxicity of DBC was observed after 72 h incubation (IC50 = 0.06 µM). The PIKK inhibitors applied at non-cytotoxic concentrations: caffeine (1 mM) and KU55933 (2.5 µM) had no significant influence on the DBC cytotoxicity, however NU7026 (5 µM) caused significant increase in the cell viability by about 25%. The combinations of the inhibitors (double or triple) where NU7026 was present also caused increase in the cell viability (i.e. cytoprotective effect) compared to the effect of DBC. The level of damage to the genetic material (DNA double strand breaks, DSB) was assessed by measuring levels of phosphorylated form of H2A histone (γH2AX) and neutral comet assay. DBC induced DSB in a concentration and time-dependent manner. NU7026 considerably reduced the level of DSB level measured by γH2AX and comet assay. The obtained results confirm that DBC is cytotoxic and causes damage to the genetic material including DSB. The DNA-PK inhibitor NU7026 increases cell viability after exposure to DBC and reduces DNA damage, what indicates an important role of the sensor kinase in mediating the effect.

EURADOS 2016 INTERCOMPARISON EXERCISE OF EYE LENS DOSEMETERS.

In the context of a new annual eye lens dose limit for occupational exposure equal to 20 mSv, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) organized an intercomparison dedicated to eye lens dosemeters, including photon and beta radiations. The objective was to complete the first intercomparison recently organized by EURADOS for photons and to update the overview of eye lens dosemeters available in Europe. The dosemeters provided by the 22 participants coming from 12 countries were all composed of thermoluminescent detectors. The dosemeters were irradiated with photon and beta fields defined in relevant standards. The results, provided by participants in terms of Hp(3), were compared to the reference delivered doses. Results are globally satisfactory for photons since 90% of the data are in accordance to the ISO 14146 standard requirements. The respective values for betas stress the fact that dosemeters designed for Hp(0.07) are not suitable to monitor the eye lens dose in case of betas.

Effectiveness of pelvic lead blanket to reduce the doses to eye lens and hands of interventional cardiologists and assistant nurses.

The aim of the present study is to analyse quantitatively the potential reduction of doses to the eye lens and the hands of an operator and a nurse by the use of a pelvic lead blanket during coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) procedures. Thermoluminescent dosimeters were used to assess dose levels to the left eye lens and fingers on both hands of both physician and nurses during single procedures performed with or without the lead blanket. The measurements were carried out at one medical centre and include dosimetric data from 100 procedures. Additional measurements including physician's and patient's doses were made on phantoms in the laboratory. In order to determine the reduction potential of the lead blanket, the doses normalized to DAP (Dose-Area Product) corresponding to the same position of dosimeter were compared against each other for both procedure categories (with and without protection). There was no statistically significant decrease observed in physicians' and nurses' eye lens doses, nor in doses normalized to DAP due to the use of the lead pelvic shield in clinic. However, some trend in reducing the eye lens doses by this shield can be observed. Regarding finger doses, the differences are statistically significant but only for physicians. The mean DAP-normalised doses to the eye lens and left and right finger of physicians, in the presence of a ceiling-suspended transparent lead shield, were 2.24e-5 ± 1.41e-5 mSv/µGym2, 2.31e-4 ± 1.21e-4 mSv/µGym2, and 2.60e-5 ± 1.57e-5 mSv/µGym2 for standard procedures performed without the lead blanket, and 1.77e-5 ± 1.17e-5 mSv/µGym2, 1.70e-4 ± 1.01e-4 mSv/µGym2, and 1.86e-5 ± 1.13e-5 mSv/µGym2 for procedures performed with it. A comparison of the results from the laboratory and the clinic shows that they are consistent regarding the eye lens, while for fingers it suggests that the dose reduction properties of the lead shield are related to the physician's work technique and both patient and lead blanket sizes or its positioning. The highest degree of reduction is observed for cranial and caudal projections together with the use of a patient-adjustable lead blanket; about a 2-fold decrease in finger doses is expected for optimum conditions. However, the laboratory measurements suggest that the use of lead blanket might slightly increase the patient dose, but only when specific projections are constantly used. This limitation should be considered by cardiologists during clinical work if this protection is used. In the light of the presented results, the ceiling-suspended transparent lead shield and the lead glasses seem to be the preferred way to reduce the doses to the eye lens, compared to the lead blanket.

The effectiveness of lead glasses in reducing the doses to eye lenses during cardiac implantation procedures performed using x-ray tubes above the patient table.

The dose reduction factors (DRF) for different types of lead glasses and C-arm units with x-ray tubes placed above the patient table were calculated from the results of measurements by loose thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and EYE-D dosimeters using a Rando phantom. The DRF values were analysed for different positions of routine dosimeters worn outside lead eyewear and confronted with DRFs calculated as the ratio of the dose equivalent to the eye measured with and without the eyewear. Moreover, for eye lens dosimeters designed to be worn behind lead glasses, multiplicative factors for various positions of dosimeter were derived in order to account for the differences between the doses measured on the inner side of the glasses and the dose equivalent to the eye lens. The DRFs calculated for the position of a routine dosimeter worn outside lead glasses on the band near the left eye lens are 5.6 and 5.7 for goggles and metallic glasses, respectively, while the DRFs calculated as the ratio of doses to the eyes measured with and without the eyewear are 10.2 and 9.9, respectively. Therefore, for dosimeters routinely used outside lead eyewear, the DRF calculated for the position of the dosimeter should be used. Otherwise, we can anticipate an almost two-fold underestimation of the doses. When the dosimeter is worn behind lead glasses, up to two-fold differences between the dose equivalent to the eye lens and the dose measured at the inner side of the glasses were observed depending on the dosimeter position.

Extremity and eye lens doses in interventional radiology and cardiology procedures: first results of the ORAMED project.

The main objective of WP1 of the ORAMED (Optimization of RAdiation protection for MEDical staff) project is to obtain a set of standardised data on extremity and eye lens doses for staff in interventional radiology (IR) and cardiology (IC) and to optimise staff protection. A coordinated measurement program in different hospitals in Europe will help towards this direction. This study aims at analysing the first results of the measurement campaign performed in IR and IC procedures in 34 European hospitals. The highest doses were found for pacemakers, renal angioplasties and embolisations. Left finger and wrist seem to receive the highest extremity doses, while the highest eye lens doses are measured during embolisations. Finally, it was concluded that it is difficult to find a general correlation between kerma area product and extremity or eye lens doses.