Literature DB >> 20065689

Triage dose assessment for partial-body exposure: dicentric analysis.

Pataje G S Prasanna1, Maria Moroni, Terry C Pellmar.   

Abstract

Partial-body biodosimetry is likely to be required after a radiological or nuclear exposure. Clinical signs and symptoms, distribution of dicentrics in circulating blood cells, organ-specific biomarkers, and physical signals in teeth and fingernails all can provide indications of non-homogeneous exposures. Organ specific biomarkers may provide early warning regarding physiological systems at risk after radiation injury. Use of a combination of markers and symptoms will be needed for clinical insights for therapeutic approaches. Analysis of dicentrics, a marker specific for radiation injury, is the "gold standard" of biodosimetry and can reveal partial-body exposures. Automation of sample processing for dicentric analysis can increase throughput with customization of off-the-shelf technologies for cytogenetic sample processing and information management. Automated analysis of the metaphase spreads is currently limited, but improvements are in development. The efforts described here bridge the technological gaps to allow the use of dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) for risk-based stratification of mass casualties. This article summarizes current knowledge on partial-body cytogenetic dose assessment, synthesizing information leading to the proposal of an approach to triage dose prediction in radiation mass casualties that is based on equivalent whole-body doses under partial-body exposure conditions and assesses the validity of using this model. An initial screening using only 20 metaphase spreads per subject can confirm irradiation above 2 Gy. A subsequent increase to 50 metaphases improves dose determination to allow risk stratification for clinical triage. Metaphases evaluated for inhomogeneous distribution of dicentrics can reveal partial-body exposures. The authors tested the validity of this approach in an in vitro model that simulates partial-body irradiation by mixing irradiated and un-irradiated lymphocytes in various proportions. Preliminary results support the notion that this approach will be effective under a range of conditions including some partial-body exposures, but may have limitations with low doses or small proportions of irradiated parts of the body. These studies address an important problem in the diagnosis of partial-body irradiation and dose assessment in mass casualties and propose a solution. However, additional work is needed to fully develop and validate the application of DCA to partial-body exposures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20065689      PMCID: PMC2806648          DOI: 10.1097/01.HP.0000348020.14969.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Phys        ISSN: 0017-9078            Impact factor:   1.316


  15 in total

1.  [Results of cytogenetic studies of the consequences of the Chernobyl accident].

Authors:  A V Sevan'kaev
Journal:  Radiats Biol Radioecol       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct

2.  Chromosome aberration analysis in persons exposed to low-level radiation from the JCO criticality accident in Tokai-mura.

Authors:  M S Sasaki; I Hayata; N Kamada; Y Kodama; S Kodama
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.724

3.  Towards a standardization of biological dosimetry by cytogenetics.

Authors:  P Voisin; F Barquinero; B Blakely; C Lindholm; D Lloyd; C Luccioni; S Miller; F Palitti; P G S Prasanna; G Stephan; H Thierens; I Turai; D Wilkinson; A Wojcik
Journal:  Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand)       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 1.770

Review 4.  Priority list of research areas for radiological nuclear threat countermeasures.

Authors:  Terry C Pellmar; Sara Rockwell
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  Abdominal radiation exposure elicits inflammatory responses and abscopal effects in the lungs of mice.

Authors:  A Van der Meeren; P Monti; M Vandamme; C Squiban; J Wysocki; N Griffiths
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  New biological indicators to evaluate and monitor radiation-induced damage: an accident case report.

Authors:  J M Bertho; L Roy; M Souidi; M Benderitter; Y Gueguen; J J Lataillade; M Prat; T Fagot; T De Revel; P Gourmelon
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  Interlaboratory comparison of the dicentric chromosome assay for radiation biodosimetry in mass casualty events.

Authors:  Ruth C Wilkins; Horst Romm; Tzu-Cheg Kao; Akio A Awa; Mitsuaki A Yoshida; Gordon K Livingston; Mark S Jenkins; Ursula Oestreicher; Terry C Pellmar; Pataje G S Prasanna
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  A collaborative exercise on cytogenetic dosimetry for simulated whole and partial body accidental irradiation.

Authors:  D C Lloyd; A A Edwards; J S Prosser; N Barjaktarovic; J K Brown; D Horvat; S R Ismail; G J Köteles; Z Almassy; A Krepinsky
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 2.433

9.  Application of the premature chromosome condensation assay in simulated partial-body radiation exposures: evaluation of the use of an automated metaphase-finder.

Authors:  W F Blakely; P G Prasanna; C J Kolanko; M D Pyle; D M Mosbrook; A S Loats; T L Rippeon; H Loats
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 6.277

10.  Cytogenetical dose estimation for 3 severely exposed patients in the JCO criticality accident in Tokai-mura.

Authors:  I Hayata; R Kanda; M Minamihisamatsu; M Furukawa; M S Sasaki
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.724

View more
  13 in total

1.  Evaluating the Special Needs of The Military for Radiation Biodosimetry for Tactical Warfare Against Deployed Troops: Comparing Military to Civilian Needs for Biodosimetry Methods.

Authors:  Ann Barry Flood; Arif N Ali; Holly K Boyle; Gaixin Du; Victoria A Satinsky; Steven G Swarts; Benjamin B Williams; Eugene Demidenko; Wilson Schreiber; Harold M Swartz
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.316

2.  Next generation platforms for high-throughput biodosimetry.

Authors:  Mikhail Repin; Helen C Turner; Guy Garty; David J Brenner
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2014-05-17       Impact factor: 0.972

3.  Comparative metabolic profiles of total and partial body radiation exposure in mice using an untargeted metabolomics approach.

Authors:  Kiran Maan; Ritu Tyagi; Ajaswrata Dutta; Radhika Bakhshi; Poonam Rana
Journal:  Metabolomics       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 4.290

4.  Prediction of in vivo radiation dose status in radiotherapy patients using ex vivo and in vivo gene expression signatures.

Authors:  Sunirmal Paul; Christopher A Barker; Helen C Turner; Amanda McLane; Suzanne L Wolden; Sally A Amundson
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  Serum RNA biomarkers for predicting survival in non-human primates following thoracic radiation.

Authors:  Jared M May; Uma Shankavaram; Michelle A Bylicky; Sunita Chopra; Kevin Scott; Shannon Martello; Karla Thrall; Jim Axtelle; Naresh Menon; C Norman Coleman; Molykutty J Aryankalayil
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 6.  Mitigating the risk of radiation-induced cancers: limitations and paradigms in drug development.

Authors:  Stephen S Yoo; Timothy J Jorgensen; Ann R Kennedy; John D Boice; Alla Shapiro; Tom C-C Hu; Brian R Moyer; Marcy B Grace; Gary J Kelloff; Michael Fenech; Pataje G S Prasanna; C Norman Coleman
Journal:  J Radiol Prot       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 1.394

7.  A critical assessment of biodosimetry methods for large-scale incidents.

Authors:  Harold M Swartz; Ann Barry Flood; Robert M Gougelet; Michael E Rea; Roberto J Nicolalde; Benjamin B Williams
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.316

Review 8.  Microfluidics as a new tool in radiation biology.

Authors:  Jerome Lacombe; Shanna Leslie Phillips; Frederic Zenhausern
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 8.679

9.  Assessment of biodosimetry methods for a mass-casualty radiological incident: medical response and management considerations.

Authors:  Julie M Sullivan; Pataje G S Prasanna; Marcy B Grace; Lynne K Wathen; Rodney L Wallace; John F Koerner; C Norman Coleman
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 1.316

Review 10.  Scientific and Logistical Considerations When Screening for Radiation Risks by Using Biodosimetry Based on Biological Effects of Radiation Rather than Dose: The Need for Prior Measurements of Homogeneity and Distribution of Dose.

Authors:  Harold M Swartz; Ann Barry Flood; Vijay K Singh; Steven G Swarts
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 2.922

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.