2004
DOI: 10.1080/15401420490900263
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Examination of Radiation Hormesis Mechanisms Using a Multistage Carcinogenesis Model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 153 publications
(240 reference statements)
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are consistent with knowledge to date on radiation‐induced cellular effects. It has been shown that key components of the radiation‐induced response include the elimination of aberrant cells through apoptosis and induction of cell cycle arrest, followed by DNA‐repair, activation of immune functions and compensatory cell proliferation [reviewed in Prekeges, ; Schollnberger et al, ; Feinendegen, ; Scott and Di Palma, ; Liu, ]. In addition to providing insight into the underlying biological response of radiation, by ranking the pathways based on BMD values a list of genes that may respond to low versus high doses of radiation was also identified (Table ), providing targets to support low dose risk assessment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results are consistent with knowledge to date on radiation‐induced cellular effects. It has been shown that key components of the radiation‐induced response include the elimination of aberrant cells through apoptosis and induction of cell cycle arrest, followed by DNA‐repair, activation of immune functions and compensatory cell proliferation [reviewed in Prekeges, ; Schollnberger et al, ; Feinendegen, ; Scott and Di Palma, ; Liu, ]. In addition to providing insight into the underlying biological response of radiation, by ranking the pathways based on BMD values a list of genes that may respond to low versus high doses of radiation was also identified (Table ), providing targets to support low dose risk assessment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…iendo is the expected number of i th type (simple or complex) of lesions created by endogenous processes (cell −1 year −1 ), irad is the expected number of i th type lesions created by radiation (mGy −1 cell −1 ) and λ i (year −1 ) is the rate of lesion removal (correct or incorrect repair). Values for these model parameters have been given (Schöllnberger et al, 2004). The values for λ sl and λ cl are 18,228 yr −1 (repair half-time of 20 min) and 3,038 yr −1 (repair half-time of 2 hr), respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current study is an extension of an ongoing collaborative effort, with the aim to improve model-based risk estimations for low doses of low-LET radiation. Earlier studies were restricted to low-LET radiation delivered at low dose rates (Schöllnberger et al, 2004; Schöllnberger et al, in press). As in the previous work, the new model accounts for simple and complex damage formed by endogenous processes and ionising radiation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, under this scenario, at the mechanistic level, beneficial effects of toxins in low concentrations can be the result of compensatory biological processes following an initial disruption in homeostasis ("homeostatic overcompensation," Calabrese & Baldwin, 2002). At the cellular level, this overcompensation phenomenon includes processes associated with receptor/signaling mechanisms (Calabrese, 2013), DNA damage repair (Schöllnberger, Stewart, Mitchel, & Hofmann, 2004), immunefunction enhancement (Cui et al, 2017), and alteration of gene expression (Sokolov & Neumann, 2015). As epigenetic mechanisms have also been described for hormetic effects (Vaiserman, 2011), a link to environmental matching theory can be made (Kaiser, 2003).…”
Section: Avail Ab Le Me Thods and Promis Ing Re S E Arch Avenue Smentioning
confidence: 99%