Use of subjective and nonsubjective methodologies to evaluate lens radiation damage in exposed populations — an overview

Worgul, Basil V.; Kundiev, Yuri; Likhtarev, I.A.; Sergienko, Nikolai M.; Wegener, Alfred; Medvedovsky, C.

doi:10.1007/s004110050022

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus keeping the epithelium from aging and accumulating molecular and metabolic errors may retard degeneration of lens homeostasis and prolong the soluble life of crystallins. This is supported by investigations with radiation cataracts, which are the result of genotoxicity [298] and are believed to be initiated by damage to the epithelial cell genome. The integrity of the lens epithelium during aging and disease has not been directly ascertained.…”

mentioning

confidence: 83%

Crystallins, genes and cataract

Bhat¹

2003

Progress in Drug Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Far from being a physical entity, assembled of inanimate structural proteins, the ocular lens epitomizes the biological ingenuity that sustains an essential and near-perfect physical system of immaculate optics. Crystallins (a, 13, and y) provide transparency by dint of their high concentration, but it is debatable whether proteins that provide transparency are any different, biologically or structurally, from those that are present in non-transparent structures or tissues. It is becoming increasingly clear that crystallins may have a plethora of metabolic and regulatory functions, both within the lens as well as outside of it. a-Crystallins are members of a small heat shock family of proteins and l3/y-crystallins belong to the family of epidermis-specific differentiation proteins. Crystallin gene expression has been studied from the perspective of the lens specificity of their promoters. Mutations in a-, 13-, and ycrystallins are linked with the phenotype of the loss of transparency. Understanding catalytiC, non-structural properties of crystallins may be critical for understanding the malfunction in molecular cascades that lead to cataractogenesis and its eventual therapeutic amelioration.Crystallins, genes and cataract

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 83%

Crystallins, genes and cataract

Bhat¹

2003

Progress in Drug Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One will note that the same uncertainty between two opposite interpretations applies to the induction of lenticular cataracts by radiation (Worgul et al 1995). In the familiar definition, the probability of such effects depends, without threshold, on dose, but their magnitude is independent of dose.…”

Section: On the Degree Of Uncertainty In Risk Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Opacification of the ocular lens and prenatal damage to the brain are examples (Worgul et al 1995;UNSCEAR 1993). While the distinction is helpful, it is in itself not free of uncertainty, and the classification of some radiation effects as deterministic is a matter of debate and of continued studies.…”

Section: A Science Of Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Certainty and Uncertainty in Radiation Research

Kellerer

1995

Health Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Radiation cataract is a late-appearing effect of radiation (Worgul et al 1996), with many parallels to radiation-induced cancer. In the past, carcinogenic effects of radiation were assumed for purposes of radiation protection to have no threshold, and to behave as stochastic phenomena; whereas radiation cataract was thought to require the killing of cells and thus was considered to be a deterministic effect dependent in severity with the extent of cell loss, and with a threshold of detectability which depended on the sensitivity with which the consequences of cell loss could be measured (Upton 1987).…”

Section: Types Of Cataractsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lauriston S. Taylor Lecture on Radiation Protection and Measurements

Blakely¹

2012

Health Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scientific basis for the physical and biological effectiveness of particle radiations has emerged from many decades of meticulous basic research. A diverse array of biologically relevant consequences at the molecular, cellular, tissue, and organism level have been reported, but what are the key processes and mechanisms that make particle radiation so effective, and what competing processes define dose dependences? Recent studies have shown that individual genotypes control radiation-regulated genes and pathways in response to radiations of varying ionization density. The fact that densely ionizing radiations can affect different gene families than sparsely ionizing radiations, and that the effects are dose- and time-dependent has opened up new areas of future research. The complex microenvironment of the stroma, and the significant contributions of the immune response have added to our understanding of tissue-specific differences across the linear energy transfer (LET) spectrum. The importance of targeted vs. nontargeted effects remain a thorny, but elusive and important contributor to chronic low dose radiation effects of variable LET that still needs further research. The induction of cancer is also LET-dependent, suggesting different mechanisms of action across the gradient of ionization density. The focus of this 35th Lauriston S. Taylor Lecture is to chronicle the step-by-step acquisition of experimental clues that have refined our understanding of what makes particle radiation so effective, with emphasis on the example of radiation effects on the crystalline lens of the human eye.

show abstract

Use of subjective and nonsubjective methodologies to evaluate lens radiation damage in exposed populations — an overview

Cited by 16 publications

References 39 publications

Crystallins, genes and cataract

Crystallins, genes and cataract

Certainty and Uncertainty in Radiation Research

Lauriston S. Taylor Lecture on Radiation Protection and Measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About