Rise of radiation protection: science, medicine and technology in society, 1896--1935

Serwer, Daniel

doi:10.2172/7212842

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Less than 10 years after the discovery of X-ray by Roentgen [5], the three major clinical consequences of irradiation were identified already (Figure 1):Radiosensitivity responses, i.e., adverse tissue events, are non-cancer effects, attributable to cell death. First reported by Giezel, Voigt, Albers-Schönberg, and Bouchacourt [6,7,8], detailed descriptions of radiodermatitis and RI reactions to other irradiated organs have progressively led to the definition of consensual severity scales [2,9], like the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) [10] and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) [11] scales. These two scales classify RI tissue reactions in six grades (grade 0: no event; grade 5: death), for each organ and independently of the early/late nature of the reactions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Nucleoshuttling of the ATM Protein: A Unified Model to Describe the Individual Response to High- and Low-Dose of Radiation?

Berthel

Foray

Ferlazzo

2019

Cancers

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evaluation of radiation-induced (RI) risks is of medical, scientific, and societal interest. However, despite considerable efforts, there is neither consensual mechanistic models nor predictive assays for describing the three major RI effects, namely radiosensitivity, radiosusceptibility, and radiodegeneration. Interestingly, the ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) protein is a major stress response factor involved in the DNA repair and signaling that appears upstream most of pathways involved in the three precited RI effects. The rate of the RI ATM nucleoshuttling (RIANS) was shown to be a good predictor of radiosensitivity. In the frame of the RIANS model, irradiation triggers the monomerization of cytoplasmic ATM dimers, which allows ATM monomers to diffuse in nucleus. The nuclear ATM monomers phosphorylate the H2AX histones, which triggers the recognition of DNA double-strand breaks and their repair. The RIANS model has made it possible to define three subgroups of radiosensitivity and provided a relevant explanation for the radiosensitivity observed in syndromes caused by mutated cytoplasmic proteins. Interestingly, hyper-radiosensitivity to a low dose and adaptive response phenomena may be also explained by the RIANS model. In this review, the relevance of the RIANS model to describe several features of the individual response to radiation was discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Nucleoshuttling of the ATM Protein: A Unified Model to Describe the Individual Response to High- and Low-Dose of Radiation?

Berthel

Foray

Ferlazzo

2019

Cancers

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, several different chemical treatments of virions are known to cause separation of heads and tails (4,8,(9)(10)(11)(12), and when this happens, the connector usually remains attached to the tail. This is at least compatible with the idea that the connector is bonded more firmly to the tail than to the head membrane, as would be expected if it has 6-fold symmetry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The phage tail attaches directly to the connector after DNA packaging. Connectors appear to have a roughly cylindrical shape, and in some cases (X, T7, T4, P22) an axial hole has been visualized oriented along the head-tail axis (4,7,8; W. C. Earnshaw, personal communication). During injection, the DNA passes out of the head and into the tail through the corner where the connector lies, and it is generally assumed that the DNA passes out through the connector.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Symmetry mismatch and DNA packaging in large bacteriophages.

Hendrix¹

1978

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

254

196

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A model is presented for the mechanism of packaging double-stranded DNA into phage heads. The model is based on, and rationalizes, the mismatch in symmetry between the heads and tails of large bacteriophages. DNA movement is postulated to be mediated by a rotating protein structure at the tail-proximal vertex of the head. A long-standing problem of virus structure concerns the fact that the symmetries of the heads and tails of large bacteriophages are different. All bacteriophage tails for which adequate data are available are now known to have 6-fold rotational symmetry, and they attach to the icosahedral head at one of the axes of 5-fold rotational symmetry (1-5). I propose here a general model for the structure of the large double-stranded DNA-containing phages that accounts for the symmetry mismatch and argue that the symmetry mismatch makes available an interesting new class of models for how double-stranded DNA is packaged into phage heads. The phages to which this discussion applies include X, T4, P22, P2/P4, T7, T3, T5, 029, and others. Casjens and King (6) have recently reviewed the general features of the structure and assembly of these viruses.Phage structure A structural feature that is probably common to all the phages under consideration is a small protein knob that lies just inside the head membrane at the unique corner of the icosahedral head where the tail attaches. This structure, which I will call the connector, is assembled as part of the head and, in at least several phages, has been implicated in the earliest steps of head assembly. The phage tail attaches directly to the connector after DNA packaging. Connectors appear to have a roughly cylindrical shape, and in some cases (X, T7, T4, P22) an axial hole has been visualized oriented along the head-tail axis (4,7,8; W. C. Earnshaw, personal communication). During injection, the DNA passes out of the head and into the tail through the corner where the connector lies, and it is generally assumed that the DNA passes out through the connector. It is also likely that the DNA passes in through the connector when it is being packaged into the head.Although it is clear that tails have a different symmetry from the icosahedral head membrane, it has never been established whether the interface between the 5-and 6-fold symmetries is at the junction between the tail and the connector or at the junction between the connector and the head membrane. [A third possibility (1)-that the connector is an adaptor with both 5-and 6-fold symmetry (i.e., with 30-fold symmetry)-seems ruled out for at least many of the phages because no proteins are present in the required 30 copies.] The symmetry of the connector has not been determined directly for any of the phages. Table 1 lists the available measurements of the numbers of copies of the proteins in connectors for several phages. Most of the numbers can plausibly be interpreted as multiples of either five or six copies, and none of the data rule out either hypothesis conclusively.I propose that the connect...

show abstract

“…Germany, the “Kaiserreich” of Emperor Wilhelm II at the time of interest, reported the most victims. It was then leading in radiology, with many manufacturers of X-ray equipment [ 19 ]. Next in number of victims are France, the USA, Japan, and Great Britain.…”

Section: Who Were the X-ray “Martyrs”?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Serwer, who prepared a comprehensive thesis on radiology before 1935, wrote [ 19 ]: “I have unfortunately been unable to find any contemporary data on the number of X-ray practitioners, but I would guess that by 1900 there were at least several hundred diagnostic X-ray installations in each of the countries of primary concern, namely Austria, England, France, Germany, and the United States.”…”

Section: Estimation Of the Number Of Early X-ray Users In Germany Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early X-ray workers: an effort to assess their numbers, risk, and most common (skin) affliction

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo assess quantitatively the number of early X-ray workers, their risk of becoming a radiation victim, and their most common radiation-induced (skin) disease.MethodsInformation on professional life and occupational disease was retrieved from the Ehrenbuch, a book of honour containing biographies of 404 radiation victims, as well as member and congress lists of the German and US radiological societies, obituaries, books, articles, and the Internet.ResultsThe estimated numbers of X-ray users in a medical setting in the US increased from about 300 to 600 in 1900–1903, in Germany from about 700 to 1200 during 1905–1908. The risk for a beginning user eventually to die from radiation was 1–2 % in these years, but up to 10–25 % in 1896. Data on 198 victims of fatal radiation-induced skin disease were collected. The incidence of the various stages of skin afflictions with a fatal outcome was characterized by very wide distributions.ConclusionsAfter 1896, the radiation risk decreased very fast at first and more slowly thereafter to nearly zero in 1935. Many victims became quite old, partly because of the slower progress of tissue reactions at lower radiation doses, partly because of the success of often multiple surgical interventions.Main messagesUS and German X-ray users amounted to several hundreds to thousand in 1900–1908.The risk eventually to die from radiation was about 1–2 % during 1900–1908.After 1896, this risk decreased from >10 % to nearly zero in 1935.The incidence of subsequent stages of skin harm varied strongly in time.X-ray victims could become quite old, dependent on radiation dose and surgery.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13244-015-0457-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Rise of radiation protection: science, medicine and technology in society, 1896--1935

Cited by 14 publications

References 1 publication

The Nucleoshuttling of the ATM Protein: A Unified Model to Describe the Individual Response to High- and Low-Dose of Radiation?

The Nucleoshuttling of the ATM Protein: A Unified Model to Describe the Individual Response to High- and Low-Dose of Radiation?

Symmetry mismatch and DNA packaging in large bacteriophages.

Early X-ray workers: an effort to assess their numbers, risk, and most common (skin) affliction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About