Literature DB >> 20585440

Low-dose cancer risk modeling must recognize up-regulation of protection.

Ludwig E Feinendegen1, Myron Pollycove, Ronald D Neumann.   

Abstract

IONIZING RADIATION PRIMARILY PERTURBS THE BASIC MOLECULAR LEVEL PROPORTIONAL TO DOSE, WITH POTENTIAL DAMAGE PROPAGATION TO HIGHER LEVELS: cells, tissues, organs, and whole body. There are three types of defenses against damage propagation. These operate deterministically and below a certain impact threshold there is no propagation. Physical-static defenses precede metabolic-dynamic defenses acting immediately: scavenging of toxins; - molecular repair, especially of DNA; - removal of damaged cells either by apoptosis, necrosis, phagocytosis, cell differentiation-senescence, or by immune responses, - followed by replacement of lost elements. Another metabolic-dynamic defense arises delayed by up-regulating immediately operating defense mechanisms. Some of these adaptive protections may last beyond a year and all create temporary protection against renewed potentially toxic impacts also from non-radiogenic endogenous sources. Adaptive protections have a maximum after single tissue absorbed doses around 100 to 200 mSv and disappear with higher doses. Low dose rates initiate maximum protection likely at lower cell doses delivered repetitively at certain time intervals. Adaptive protection preventing only about 2 - 3 % of endogenous life-time cancer risk would fully balance a calculated induced cancer risk at about 100 mSv, in agreement with epidemiological data and concordant with an hormetic effect. Low-dose-risk modeling must recognize up-regulation of protection.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Low-dose cancer risk; adaptive protections; hormesis

Year:  2009        PMID: 20585440      PMCID: PMC2889507          DOI: 10.2203/dose-response.09-035.Feinendegen

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dose Response        ISSN: 1559-3258            Impact factor:   2.658


  49 in total

1.  Inverse radiation dose-rate effects on somatic and germ-line mutations and DNA damage rates.

Authors:  M M Vilenchik; A G Knudson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-05-09       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Low-dose exposure to gamma rays induces specific gene regulations in normal human keratinocytes.

Authors:  Noreli Franco; Jérôme Lamartine; Vincent Frouin; Pascale Le Minter; Cyrille Petat; Jean-Jacques Leplat; Frédérick Libert; Xavier Gidrol; Michèle T Martin
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 3.  Radiation-induced bystander effects and the DNA paradigm: an "out of field" perspective.

Authors:  Carmel Mothersill; C B Seymour
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2006-01-18       Impact factor: 2.433

4.  Threshold-type dose response for induction of neoplastic transformation by 1 GeV/nucleon iron ions.

Authors:  E Elmore; X-Y Lao; R Kapadia; J L Redpath
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  The meaning of linear dose-response relations, made evident by use of absorbed dose to the cell.

Authors:  V P Bond; V Benary; C A Sondhaus; L E Feinendegen
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 1.316

6.  Adaptive response of human lymphocytes to low concentrations of radioactive thymidine.

Authors:  G Olivieri; J Bodycote; S Wolff
Journal:  Science       Date:  1984-02-10       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Low dose effect of ionizing radiation on incorporation of iododeoxyuridine into bone marrow cells.

Authors:  N Zamboglou; W Porschen; H Mühlensiepen; J Booz; L E Feinendegen
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med       Date:  1981-01

8.  Effect of recent changes in atomic bomb survivor dosimetry on cancer mortality risk estimates.

Authors:  Dale L Preston; Donald A Pierce; Yukiko Shimizu; Harry M Cullings; Shoichiro Fujita; Sachiyo Funamoto; Kazunori Kodama
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.841

9.  Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998.

Authors:  D L Preston; E Ron; S Tokuoka; S Funamoto; N Nishi; M Soda; K Mabuchi; K Kodama
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.841

10.  WR-1065, the active metabolite of amifostine, mitigates radiation-induced delayed genomic instability.

Authors:  Jaroslaw Dziegielewski; Janet E Baulch; Wilfried Goetz; Mitchell C Coleman; Douglas R Spitz; Jeffrey S Murley; David J Grdina; William F Morgan
Journal:  Free Radic Biol Med       Date:  2008-09-18       Impact factor: 7.376

View more
  25 in total

1.  A stochastic markov model of cellular response to radiation.

Authors:  Krzysztof Wojciech Fornalski; Ludwik Dobrzyński; Marek Krzysztof Janiak
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 2.658

2.  Special issue introduction.

Authors:  Bobby R Scott
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 2.658

3.  Point/Counterpoint: low-dose radiation is beneficial, not harmful.

Authors:  Mohan Doss; Mark P Little; Colin G Orton
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Low dose radiation adaptive protection to control neurodegenerative diseases.

Authors:  Mohan Doss
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  Residential radon appears to prevent lung cancer.

Authors:  Bobby R Scott
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 2.658

6.  Commentary on fukushima and beneficial effects of low radiation.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 2.658

7.  Linear No-Threshold Model VS. Radiation Hormesis.

Authors:  Mohan Doss
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 2.658

8.  Remedy for radiation fear - discard the politicized science.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 2.658

9.  Commentary: ethical issues of current health-protection policies on low-dose ionizing radiation.

Authors:  Yehoshua Socol; Ludwik Dobrzyński; Mohan Doss; Ludwig E Feinendegen; Marek K Janiak; Mark L Miller; Charles L Sanders; Bobby R Scott; Brant Ulsh; Alexander Vaiserman
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 2.658

10.  Correcting systemic deficiencies in our scientific infrastructure.

Authors:  Mohan Doss
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 2.658

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.