Literature DB >> 21949482

Biological Dosimetry by the Triage Dicentric Chromosome Assay - Further validation of International Networking.

Ruth C Wilkins1, Horst Romm, Ursula Oestreicher, Leonora Marro, Mitsuaki A Yoshida, Y Suto, Pataje G S Prasanna.   

Abstract

Biological dosimetry is an essential tool for estimating radiation doses received to personnel when physical dosimetry is not available or inadequate. The current preferred biodosimetry method is based on the measurement of radiation-specific dicentric chromosomes in exposed individuals' peripheral blood lymphocytes. However, this method is labour-, time- and expertise-demanding. Consequently, for mass casualty applications, strategies have been developed to increase its throughput. One such strategy is to develop validated cytogenetic biodosimetry laboratory networks, both national and international. In a previous study, the dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) was validated in our cytogenetic biodosimetry network involving five geographically dispersed laboratories. A complementary strategy to further enhance the throughput of the DCA among inter-laboratory networks is to use a triage DCA where dose assessments are made by truncating the labour-demanding and time-consuming metaphase-spread analysis to 20 to 50 metaphase spreads instead of routine 500 to 1000 metaphase spread analysis. Our laboratory network also validated this triage DCA, however, these dose estimates were made using calibration curves generated in each laboratory from the blood samples irradiated in a single laboratory. In an emergency situation, dose estimates made using pre-existing calibration curves which may vary according to radiation type and dose rate and therefore influence the assessed dose. Here, we analyze the effect of using a pre-existing calibration curve on assessed dose among our network laboratories. The dose estimates were made by analyzing 1000 metaphase spreads as well as triage quality scoring and compared to actual physical doses applied to the samples for validation. The dose estimates in the laboratory partners were in good agreement with the applied physical doses and determined to be adequate for guidance in the treatment of acute radiation syndrome.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 21949482      PMCID: PMC3176593          DOI: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2011.03.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Meas        ISSN: 1350-4487            Impact factor:   1.898


  15 in total

1.  The role of cytogenetics in early triage of radiation casualties.

Authors:  D C Lloyd; A A Edwards; J E Moquet; Y C Guerrero-Carbajal
Journal:  Appl Radiat Isot       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 1.513

2.  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

3.  Sample Tracking in an Automated Cytogenetic Biodosimetry Laboratory for Radiation Mass Casualties.

Authors:  P R Martin; R E Berdychevski; U Subramanian; W F Blakely; P G S Prasanna
Journal:  Radiat Meas       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.898

4.  WHO 1st consultation on the development of a global biodosimetry laboratories network for radiation emergencies (BioDoseNet).

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

5.  Medical response to a radiologic/nuclear event: integrated plan from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Department of Health and Human Services.

Authors:  C Norman Coleman; Chad Hrdina; Judith L Bader; Ann Norwood; Robert Hayhurst; Joseph Forsha; Kevin Yeskey; Ann Knebel
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 5.721

6.  Biological dosimetry for triage of casualties in a large-scale radiological emergency:capacity of the EU member states.

Authors:  Andrzej Wojcik; David Lloyd; Horst Romm; Laurence Roy
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 0.972

7.  Biological dosimetry by the triage dicentric chromosome assay: potential implications for treatment of acute radiation syndrome in radiological mass casualties.

Authors:  Horst Romm; Ruth C Wilkins; C Norman Coleman; Patricia K Lillis-Hearne; Terry C Pellmar; Gordon K Livingston; Akio A Awa; Mark S Jenkins; Mitsuaki A Yoshida; Ursula Oestreicher; Pataje G S Prasanna
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  Intercomparison in cytogenetic dosimetry among five laboratories from Latin America.

Authors:  O F Garcia; A T Ramalho; M Di Giorgio; S S Mir; M E Espinoza; J Manzano; N Nasazzi; I López
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 2.433

9.  Chromosomal analysis to assess radiation dose.

Authors:  D C Lloyd
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 6.277

10.  Medical management of the acute radiation syndrome: recommendations of the Strategic National Stockpile Radiation Working Group.

Authors:  Jamie K Waselenko; Thomas J MacVittie; William F Blakely; Nicki Pesik; Albert L Wiley; William E Dickerson; Horace Tsu; Dennis L Confer; C Norman Coleman; Thomas Seed; Patrick Lowry; James O Armitage; Nicholas Dainiak
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2004-06-15       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Radiation signature on exposed cells: Relevance in dose estimation.

Authors:  Venkatachalam Perumal; Tamizh Selvan Gnana Sekaran; Venkateswarlu Raavi; Safa Abdul Syed Basheerudeen; Karthik Kanagaraj; Amith Roy Chowdhury; Solomon Fd Paul
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2015-09-28

2.  Use of a Humanized Mouse Model System in the Validation of Human Radiation Biodosimetry Standards.

Authors:  Monica Pujol-Canadell; Erik Young; Lubomir Smilenov
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 2.841

3.  An automated imaging system for radiation biodosimetry.

Authors:  Guy Garty; Alan W Bigelow; Mikhail Repin; Helen C Turner; Dakai Bian; Adayabalam S Balajee; Oleksandra V Lyulko; Maria Taveras; Y Lawrence Yao; David J Brenner
Journal:  Microsc Res Tech       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 2.769

4.  Advances in a framework to compare bio-dosimetry methods for triage in large-scale radiation events.

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

5.  THE DECADE OF THE RABiT (2005-15).

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

6.  Comparison of established and emerging biodosimetry assays.

Authors:  K Rothkamm; C Beinke; H Romm; C Badie; Y Balagurunathan; S Barnard; N Bernard; H Boulay-Greene; M Brengues; A De Amicis; S De Sanctis; R Greither; F Herodin; A Jones; S Kabacik; T Knie; U Kulka; F Lista; P Martigne; A Missel; J Moquet; U Oestreicher; A Peinnequin; T Poyot; U Roessler; H Scherthan; B Terbrueggen; H Thierens; M Valente; A Vral; F Zenhausern; V Meineke; H Braselmann; M Abend
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 7.  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

8.  Calibration Curve for Dicentric Chromosomes Induced in Human Blood Lymphocytes Exposed to Gamma Rays at a Dose Rate of 12.5 mGy/s.

Authors:  Tran Que; Pham Ngoc Duy; Bui Thi Kim Luyen
Journal:  Genome Integr       Date:  2016-12-30

Review 9.  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

Review 10.  The Efficacy of Periodic Complete Blood Count Tests in Evaluation of the Health Status of Radiation Workers in Iran: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Asma Zare; Seyed Mohammad Javad Mortazavi
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.429

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.