Overview of biodosimetry for management of unplanned exposures to ionizing radiation

Swartz, Harold M.; Williams, Benjamin B.; Nicolalde, Roberto J.; Demidenko, Eugene; Flood, Ann Barry

doi:10.1016/j.radmeas.2011.03.011

Cited by 33 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While some have focused on integrating triage by building an effective network of facilities to handle the surge needs for one method of biodosimetry (Christie, Chu and Carr, 2010), others have urged using the information from several methods for estimating an individual’s dose, e.g., by using a formula or multiparametric approaches (AFRRI 2011; Rjecke, Ruf and Meineke 2010). Here we espouse the approach others have advocated (Grace et al 2010, Swartz et al 2011) that seeks to maximize effective triaging by creating tiers of assessment. The first tier focuses on techniques that can quickly manage large numbers in the field with immediate feedback based on whether the exposure exceeded a threshold.…”

Section: Conclusion Discussion and Next Stepsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for comparative evaluation of dosimetric methods to triage a large population following a radiological event

Flood

Nicolalde

Demidenko

et al. 2011

Radiation Measurements

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To prepare for a possible major radiation disaster involving large numbers of potentially exposed people, it is important to be able to rapidly and accurately triage people for treatment or not, factoring in the likely conditions and available resources. To date, planners have had to create guidelines for triage based on methods for estimating dose that are clinically available and which use evidence extrapolated from unrelated conditions. Current guidelines consequently focus on measuring clinical symptoms (e.g., time-to-vomiting), which may not be subject to the same verification of standard methods and validation processes required for governmental approval processes of new and modified procedures. Biodosimeters under development have not yet been formally approved for this use. Neither set of methods has been tested in settings involving large-scale populations at risk for exposure. Objective To propose a framework for comparative evaluation of methods for such triage and to evaluate biodosimetric methods that are currently recommended and new methods as they are developed. Methods We adapt the NIH model of scientific evaluations and sciences needed for effective translational research to apply to biodosimetry for triaging very large populations following a radiation event. We detail criteria for translating basic science about dosimetry into effective multi-stage triage of large populations and illustrate it by analyzing 3 current guidelines and 3 advanced methods for biodosimetry. Conclusions This framework for evaluating dosimetry in large populations is a useful technique to compare the strengths and weaknesses of different dosimetry methods. It can help policy-makers and planners not only to compare the methods’ strengths and weaknesses for their intended use but also to develop an integrated approach to maximize their effectiveness. It also reveals weaknesses in methods that would benefit from further research and evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion Discussion and Next Stepsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for comparative evaluation of dosimetric methods to triage a large population following a radiological event

Flood

Nicolalde

Demidenko

et al. 2011

Radiation Measurements

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include both physical dosimetry and biological dosimetry. Swartz et al (2011) note that both techniques have the ability to assess absorbed dose at the level of the individual but bring different advantages and disadvantages.…”

Section: Emergency Dosimetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective and emergency dosimetry in response to radiological incidents and nuclear mass-casualty events: A review

Bailiff

Sholom

McKeever

2016

Radiation Measurements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additional information:Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. HIGHLIGHTSReview of the use of luminescence and electron paramagnetic resonance in retrospective and emergency dosimetry.Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), thermoluminescence (TL) and Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR) results on biological and physical materials.Descriptions of use in emergency and retrospective dosimetry, following large-scale radiological events.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1350448716302359 ABSTRACTThis paper reviews recent research on the application of the physical dosimetry techniques of electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) and luminescence (optically stimulated luminescence, OSL, and thermoluminescence, TL) to determine radiation dose following catastrophic, large-scale radiological events. Such data are used in dose reconstruction to obtain estimates of dose due to the exposure to external sources of radiation, primarily gamma radiation, by individual members of the public and by populations. The EPR and luminescence techniques have been applied to a wide range of radiological studies, including nuclear bomb detonation (e.g., Hiroshima and Nagasaki) nuclear power plant accidents (e.g., Chernobyl), radioactive pollution (e.g., Mayak plutonium facility), and in the future could include terrorist events involving the dispersal of radioactive materials. In this review we examine the application of these techniques in 'emergency' and 'retrospective' modes of operation that are conducted on two distinct timescales. For emergency dosimetry immediate action to evaluate dose to individuals following radiation exposure is required to assess deterministic biological effects and to enable rapid medical triage. Retrospective dosimetry, on the other hand, contributes to the reconstruction of doses to populations and individuals following external exposure, and contributes to the long-term study of stochastic processes and the consequential epidemiological effects. Although internal exposure, via ingestion of radionuclides for example, can be a potentially significant contributor to dose, this review is confined to those dose components arising from exposure to external radiation, which in most studies is gamma radiation.The nascent emergency dosimetry measurement techniques aim to perform direct dose evaluations for individuals who, as members of the public, are most unlikely to be carrying a dosimeter issued for radiation monitoring purposes in the event of a radiation incident. Hence attention has focused on b...

show abstract

“…Consequently, a large number of people with worries of being exposed may need to be examined in terms of received dose (NCRP 2001). Swartz et al (2011) has defined four areas of use for which retrospective dosimeters are needed after an unexpected radiation event. (i) Triaging after a large scale event, (ii) guiding medical management after a large scale event, (iii) guiding medical management after a small scale event and (iv) determining long-term consequences of the exposure.…”

Section: Chewing Gum As a Retrospective Dosimetermentioning

confidence: 99%

Chewing gum and human hair as retrospective dosimeters

Israelsson¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrospective dosimeters are sometimes needed after radiological/nuclear (RN) exposures to determine the doses to individuals. Conventional dosimeters may not be at hand or may not be applicable calling for alternative materials.The possible exposure situations can be divided into external and internal; the radiation field stems either from outside the body or from a source within. This thesis investigates the possibility to use chewing gum and hair as retrospective dosimeters. The chewing gum would be used after an unexpected radiation event of external type whereas human hair is examined after chronic intake of uranium. Chewing gum containing xylitol and sorbitol was analyzed using electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) and the hair was analyzed by alpha-spectrometry following radiochemistry and by synchrotron radiation microbeam x-ray fluorescence (SR µ-XRF).Xylitol and chewing gum (in this particular case, V6) are in the present work found to be valuable dosimeters after unexpected radiation events. The xylitol signal linearity with dose in the interval 0-10 Gy was confirmed (r 2 =1.00). The doses to the coating of the chewing gums were determined 4-6 days after irradiation with an uncertainty of less than 0.2 Gy (1 SD). Spectral dependence with time after exposure was found, but was, however, minimal between 4-8 days.Hair was evaluated and compared with urine as biodosimeter after ingestion and inhalation intake of uranium. Concentrations of 234 U and 238 U and their activity ratios were measured in the hair, urine and drinking water sampled from 24 drilled bedrock well water users in Östergötland, Sweden, as well as among 8 workers at a nuclear fuel fabrication factory, Westinghouse Electric Sweden. The results show that there is a stronger correlation between the uranium concentrations in the drinking water of the well water and the users' hair (r 2 = 0.50) than with their urine (r 2 = 0.21). There is also a stronger correlation between the 234 U/ 238 U activity ratios of water and hair (r 2 = 0.91) than between water and urine (r 2 = 0.56). The individual absorbed fraction of uranium, the value, calculated as the ratio between the excreted amount of uranium in urine and hair per day and the daily drinking water intake of uranium stretched from 0.002 to 0.10 with a median of 0.023. The uranium concentrations of the fuel factory workers' hair and urine were also obtained as well as that of personal air sampler (PAS) filters for the determination of inhaled uranium activity. A large day-to-day variation (7-70 Bq d -1 ) of the inhaled 234 U activity was seen over a 6 week period. Over a 12 week period the 234 U activity concentration in urine was similarly seen to vary from 2 to 50 mBq kg -1 . Four hair samples from the same subject and period showed less variation (100-240 mBq g -1 ). The uranium inhalation to urine and hair factors f inh,u and f inh,h were found to be 0.0014 and 0.0002 respectively given by calculations based on the measured PAS, urine and hair data from two individuals. The SR µ-XR...

show abstract

Overview of biodosimetry for management of unplanned exposures to ionizing radiation

Cited by 33 publications

References 30 publications

A framework for comparative evaluation of dosimetric methods to triage a large population following a radiological event

A framework for comparative evaluation of dosimetric methods to triage a large population following a radiological event

Retrospective and emergency dosimetry in response to radiological incidents and nuclear mass-casualty events: A review

Chewing gum and human hair as retrospective dosimeters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About