Efficacy of 3,4,3-LI(1,2-HOPO) for decorporation of Pu,Am and U from rats injected intramuscularly with high-fired particles of MOX

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of 3,4,3-LI(1,2-HOPO) for reducing uranium, plutonium and americium in rats after intramuscular injection of (U-Pu)O2 particles (MOX). Sixteen rats were contaminated by intramuscular injection of a 1 mg MOX suspension and then treated daily for 7 d with LIHOPO (30 or 200 micromol kg(-1)) or DTPA (30 micromol kg(-1)). LIHOPO was inefficient for removing Pu, Am and U from the wound site. However, it reduced Pu retention in carcass and liver by factors of 2 and 6 respectively, and Am retention in carcass and liver by factors of 10 and 30. In contrast, the effect of LIHOPO on U was to decrease the retention in kidneys by a factor of 75. These results confirm that LIHOPO is a good candidate for use after contamination with MOX, in combination with localised wound lavage or surgical treatment aimed at removing most of the contaminant at the wound site.

Biodistribution of the Multidentate Hydroxypyridinonate Ligand [14C]‐3,4,3‐LI(1,2‐HOPO), a Potent Actinide Decorporation Agent

“…The ultimate goal of this project is to make available for the public an orally efficacious chelating agent that can enhance the removal of internalized actinides, thereby reducing the risks of long‐term debilitating health effects. Plutonium, americium, and other actinide decorporation properties of 3,4,3‐LI(1,2‐HOPO) in rodents have been previously reported [Paquet et al, ]. However, it has not been confirmed whether the metals removed from the body are ligand bound or in free ion forms.…”

Increased retention of americium in kidneys as compared with plutonium in an actinide wound contamination model in the rat

“…Few data are available on the behavior of MOX following wounding. Th is work has concentrated on the alpha-emitting elements and not on uranium for which however some experimental data after wounding are available (Paquet et al 2003, Petitot et al 2007. Th e experimental use of MOX allows the comparison of the handling of the two actinides, Pu and Am, following contamination with a single material.…”

“…For nuclear industry workers the most frequent actinide forms encountered are nitrates or oxides. However whatever the form, Am has been demonstrated in vitro to be more soluble than Pu (Eidson and Mewhinney 1983) as well as in vivo following diff erent modes of contamination such as ' simulated wounds ' or inhalation (Harrison et al 1993, Ramounet et al 2000, Paquet et al 2003, Van der Meeren and Gremy 2010, Griffi ths et al 2012). Due to this higher solubility Am has been shown to distribute more rapidly than Pu to tissues such as bone and liver that are the major retention organs for these actinides (ICRP 1986).…”

Desferrithiocin analogue uranium decorporation agents

“…The rats were given the actinide s.c. (1 ml kg −1 ) at a dose of 1 mg U kg −1 . Note that unlike a “wound simulation,” in which the actinide and decorporation agent may be premixed in a syringe prior to administration (Paquet et al, 2000), or injected in the same location (Paquet et al, 2003), in these experiments the s.c. injections were given on the opposite sides of the body; the uranium was injected in the left flank, while the chelator was given in the right flank. This is an important distinction, as premixing/injecting both solutions in the same area could artificially overestimate the efficacy of the decorporation agent.…”