Guy Garty1, Andrew Karam, David J Brenner. 1. Radiological Research Accelerator Facility, Columbia University, Irvington, NY 10533, USA. gyg2101@columbia.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: After a large-scale radiological event, there will be a pressing need to assess, within a few days, the radiation doses received by tens or hundreds of thousands of individuals. This is for triage, to prevent treatment locations from being overwhelmed, in what is sure to be a resource limited scenario, as well as to facilitate dose-dependent treatment decisions. In addition there are psycho-social considerations, in that active reassurance of minimal exposure is a potentially effective antidote to mass panic, as well as long-term considerations, to facilitate later studies of cancer and other long-term disease risks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As described elsewhere in this issue, we are developing a Rapid Automated Biodosimetry Tool (RABiT). The RABiT allows high throughput analysis of thousands of blood samples per day, providing a dose estimate that can be used to support clinical triage and treatment decisions. RESULTS: Development of the RABiT has motivated us to consider the logistics of incorporating such a system into the existing emergency response scenarios of a large metropolitan area. We present here a view of how one or more centralized biodosimetry readout devices might be incorporated into an infrastructure in which fingerstick blood samples are taken at many distributed locations within an affected city or region and transported to centralized locations. CONCLUSIONS: High throughput biodosimetry systems offer the opportunity to perform biodosimetric assessments on a large number of persons. As such systems reach a high level of maturity, emergency response scenarios will need to be tweaked to make use of these powerful tools. This can be done relatively easily within the framework of current scenarios.
PURPOSE: After a large-scale radiological event, there will be a pressing need to assess, within a few days, the radiation doses received by tens or hundreds of thousands of individuals. This is for triage, to prevent treatment locations from being overwhelmed, in what is sure to be a resource limited scenario, as well as to facilitate dose-dependent treatment decisions. In addition there are psycho-social considerations, in that active reassurance of minimal exposure is a potentially effective antidote to mass panic, as well as long-term considerations, to facilitate later studies of cancer and other long-term disease risks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As described elsewhere in this issue, we are developing a Rapid Automated Biodosimetry Tool (RABiT). The RABiT allows high throughput analysis of thousands of blood samples per day, providing a dose estimate that can be used to support clinical triage and treatment decisions. RESULTS: Development of the RABiT has motivated us to consider the logistics of incorporating such a system into the existing emergency response scenarios of a large metropolitan area. We present here a view of how one or more centralized biodosimetry readout devices might be incorporated into an infrastructure in which fingerstick blood samples are taken at many distributed locations within an affected city or region and transported to centralized locations. CONCLUSIONS: High throughput biodosimetry systems offer the opportunity to perform biodosimetric assessments on a large number of persons. As such systems reach a high level of maturity, emergency response scenarios will need to be tweaked to make use of these powerful tools. This can be done relatively easily within the framework of current scenarios.
Authors: William F Blakely; Zhanat Carr; May Chin-May Chu; Renu Dayal-Drager; Kenzo Fujimoto; Michael Hopmeir; Ulrike Kulka; Patricia Lillis-Hearne; Gordon K Livingston; David C Lloyd; Natalie Maznyk; Maria Del Rosario Perez; Horst Romm; Yoshio Takashima; Phillipe Voisin; Ruth C Wilkins; Mitsuaki A Yoshida Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Helen C Turner; David J Brenner; Youhua Chen; Antonella Bertucci; Jian Zhang; Hongliang Wang; Oleksandra V Lyulko; Yanping Xu; Igor Shuryak; Julia Schaefer; Nabil Simaan; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; Y Lawrence Yao; Sally A Amundson; Guy Garty Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2010-12-28 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Guy Garty; Youhua Chen; Alessio Salerno; Helen Turner; Jian Zhang; Oleksandra Lyulko; Antonella Bertucci; Yanping Xu; Hongliang Wang; Nabil Simaan; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; Y Lawrence Yao; Sally A Amundson; David J Brenner Journal: Health Phys Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: David J Brenner; Nelson J Chao; Joel S Greenberger; Chandan Guha; William H McBride; Harold M Swartz; Jacqueline P Williams Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Oleksandra V Lyulko; Guy Garty; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; Helen C Turner; Barbara Szolc; David J Brenner Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2014-02-06 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Ann Barry Flood; Holly K Boyle; Gaixin Du; Eugene Demidenko; Roberto J Nicolalde; Benjamin B Williams; Harold M Swartz Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2014-04-11 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: G Garty; H C Turner; A Salerno; A Bertucci; J Zhang; Y Chen; A Dutta; P Sharma; D Bian; M Taveras; H Wang; A Bhatla; A Balajee; A W Bigelow; M Repin; O V Lyulko; N Simaan; Y L Yao; D J Brenner Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2016-07-13 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: Guy Garty; Youhua Chen; Helen C Turner; Jian Zhang; Oleksandra V Lyulko; Antonella Bertucci; Yanping Xu; Hongliang Wang; Nabil Simaan; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; Y Lawrence Yao; David J Brenner Journal: Int J Radiat Biol Date: 2011-05-11 Impact factor: 2.694
Authors: Igor Shuryak; Shanaz A Ghandhi; Helen C Turner; Waylon Weber; Dunstana Melo; Sally A Amundson; David J Brenner Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 2.841