Literature DB >> 14614921

Relative biological effectiveness (RBE), quality factor (Q), and radiation weighting factor (w(R)). A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.

.   

Abstract

The effect of ionising radiation is influenced by the dose, the dose rate, and the quality of the radiation. Before 1990, dose-equivalent quantities were defined in terms of a quality factor, Q(L), that was applied to the absorbed dose at a point in order to take into account the differences in the effects of different types of radiation. In its 1990 recommendations, the ICRP introduced a modified concept. For radiological protection purposes, the absorbed dose is averaged over an organ or tissue, T, and this absorbed dose average is weighted for the radiation quality in terms of the radiation weighting factor, w(R), for the type and energy of radiation incident on the body. The resulting weighted dose is designated as the organ- or tissue-equivalent dose, H(T). The sum of the organ-equivalent doses weighted by the ICRP organ-weighting factors, w(T), is termed the effective dose, E. Measurements can be performed in terms of the operational quantities, ambient dose equivalent, and personal dose equivalent. These quantities continue to be defined in terms of the absorbed dose at the reference point weighted by Q(L). The values for w(R) and Q(L) in the 1990 recommendations were based on a review of the biological and other information available, but the underlying relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values and the choice of w(R) values were not elaborated in detail. Since 1990, there have been substantial developments in biological and dosimetric knowledge that justify a re-appraisal of w(R) values and how they may be derived. This re-appraisal is the principal objective of the present report. The report discusses in some detail the values of RBE with regard to stochastic effects, which are central to the selection of w(R) and Q(L). Those factors and the dose-equivalent quantities are restricted to the dose range of interest to radiation protection, i.e. to the general magnitude of the dose limits. In special circumstances where one deals with higher doses that can cause deterministic effects, the relevant RBE values are applied to obtain a weighted dose. The question of RBE values for deterministic effects and how they should be used is also treated in the report, but it is an issue that will demand further investigations. This report is one of a set of documents being developed by ICRP Committees in order to advise the ICRP on the formulation of its next Recommendations for Radiological Protection. Thus, while the report suggests some future modifications, the w(R) values given in the 1990 recommendations are still valid at this time. The report provides a scientific background and suggests how the ICRP might proceed with the derivation of w(R) values ahead of its forthcoming recommendations.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14614921     DOI: 10.1016/s0146-6453(03)00024-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann ICRP        ISSN: 0146-6453


  104 in total

1.  Cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and intracellular distribution of the Auger electron emitter (65)Zn in two human cell lines.

Authors:  Ralf Kriehuber; Manuela Riedling; Myrtill Simkó; Dieter G Weiss
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2004-04-23       Impact factor: 1.925

2.  Accuracy of RBE: experimental and theoretical considerations.

Authors:  T Friedrich; W Weyrather; T Elsässer; M Durante; M Scholz
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  Estimate of the uncertainties in the relative risk of secondary malignant neoplasms following proton therapy and intensity-modulated photon therapy.

Authors:  Jonas D Fontenot; Charles Bloch; David Followill; Uwe Titt; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Predicted risks of second malignant neoplasm incidence and mortality due to secondary neutrons in a girl and boy receiving proton craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Dragan Mirkovic; Rui Zhang; Annelise Giebeler; David Kornguth; Mark Harvey; Shiao Woo; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Risk of second malignant neoplasm following proton versus intensity-modulated photon radiotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Rebecca M Howell; Sunil Krishnan; Sarah B Scarboro; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  A mouse model of cytogenetic analysis to evaluate caesium137 radiation dose exposure and contamination level in lymphocytes.

Authors:  Sandrine Roch-Lefèvre; Cécile Martin-Bodiot; Eric Grégoire; Aurélie Desbrée; Laurence Roy; Joan Francesc Barquinero
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 1.925

7.  Fluoroscopy X-Ray Organ-Specific Dosimetry System (FLUXOR) for Estimation of Organ Doses and Their Uncertainties in the Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study.

Authors:  A Iulian Apostoaei; Brian A Thomas; F Owen Hoffman; David C Kocher; Kathleen M Thiessen; David Borrego; Choonsik Lee; Steven L Simon; Lydia B Zablotska
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  Assessment of out-of-field absorbed dose and equivalent dose in proton fields.

Authors:  Ben Clasie; Andrew Wroe; Hanne Kooy; Nicolas Depauw; Jay Flanz; Harald Paganetti; Anatoly Rosenfeld
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 9.  Assessment of the risk for developing a second malignancy from scattered and secondary radiation in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.316

10.  Comparison of risk of radiogenic second cancer following photon and proton craniospinal irradiation for a pediatric medulloblastoma patient.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Rebecca M Howell; Annelise Giebeler; Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.