No abstract

In case of a large-scale radiological incident, the pooling of ressources by networks can enhance the rapid classification of individuals in medically relevant treatment groups based on the DCA. The performance of the RENEB network as a whole has clearly benefited from harmonization processes and specific training activities for the network partners.

No abstract

Micronucleus (MN) expression in peripheral blood lymphocytes is well established as a standard method for monitoring chromosome damage in human populations. The first results of an analysis of pooled data from laboratories using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay and participating in the HUMN (HUman MicroNucleus project) international collaborative study are presented. The effects of laboratory protocol, scoring criteria, and host factors on baseline micronucleated binucleate cell (MNC) frequency are evaluated, and a reference range of "normal" values against which future studies may be compared is provided. Primary data from historical records were submitted by 25 laboratories distributed in 16 countries. This resulted in a database of nearly 7000 subjects. Potentially significant differences were present in the methods used by participating laboratories, such as in the type of culture medium, the concentration of cytochalasin-B, the percentage of fetal calf serum, and in the culture method. Differences in criteria for scoring micronuclei were also evident. The overall median MNC frequency in nonexposed (i.e., normal) subjects was 6.5 per thousand and the interquartile range was between 3 and 12 per thousand. An increase in MNC frequency with age was evident in all but two laboratories. The effect of gender, although not so evident in all databases, was also present, with females having a 19% higher level of MNC frequency (95% confidence interval: 14-24%). Statistical analyses were performed using random-effects models for correlated data. Our best model, which included exposure to genotoxic factors, host factors, methods, and scoring criteria, explained 75% of the total variance, with the largest contribution attributable to laboratory methods.

Well-defined protocols and quality management standards are indispensable for biological dosimetry laboratories. Participation in periodic proficiency testing by interlaboratory comparisons is also required. This harmonization is essential if a cooperative network is used to respond to a mass casualty event. Here we present an international intercomparison based on dicentric chromosome analysis for dose assessment performed in the framework of the IAEA Regional Latin American RLA/9/054 Project. The exercise involved 14 laboratories, 8 from Latin America and 6 from Europe. The performance of each laboratory and the reproducibility of the exercise were evaluated using robust methods described in ISO standards. The study was based on the analysis of slides from samples irradiated with 0.75 (DI) and 2.5 Gy (DII). Laboratories were required to score the frequency of dicentrics and convert them to estimated doses, using their own dose-effect curves, after the analysis of 50 or 100 cells (triage mode) and after conventional scoring of 500 cells or 100 dicentrics. In the conntional scoring, at both doses, all reported frequencies were considered as satisfactory, and two reported doses were considered as questionable. The analysis of the data dispersion among the dicentric frequencies and among doses indicated a better reproducibility for estimated doses (15.6% for DI and 8.8% for DII) than for frequencies (24.4% for DI and 11.4% for DII), expressed by the coefficient of variation. In the two triage modes, although robust analysis classified some reported frequencies or doses as unsatisfactory or questionable, all estimated doses were in agreement with the accepted error of ±0.5 Gy. However, at the DI dose and for 50 scored cells, 5 out of the 14 reported confidence intervals that included zero dose and could be interpreted as false negatives. This improved with 100 cells, where only one confidence interval included zero dose. At the DII dose, all estimations fell within ±0.5 Gy of the reference dose interval. The results obtained in this triage exercise indicated that it is better to report doses than frequencies. Overall, in both triage and conventional scoring modes, the laboratory performances were satisfactory for mutual cooperation purposes. These data reinforce the view that collaborative networking in the case of a mass casualty event can be successful.

Recent progress especially in the field of gene identification and expression has attracted greater attention to the genetic and epigenetic susceptibility to cancer, possibly enhanced by ionising radiation. This issue is especially important for radiation therapists since hypersensitive patients may suffer from adverse effects in normal tissues following standard radiation therapy, while normally sensitive patients could receive higher doses of radiation, offering a better likelihood of cure for malignant tumours. Although only a small percentage of individuals are "hypersensitive" to radiation effects, all medical specialists using ionising radiation should be aware of the aforementioned progress in medical knowledge. The present paper, the second of two parts, reviews human disorders known or strongly suspected to be associated with hypersensitivity to ionising radiation. The main tests capable of detecting such pathologies in advance are analysed, and ethical issues regarding genetic testing are considered. The implications for radiation protection of possible hypersensitivity to radiation in a part of the population are discussed, and some guidelines for nuclear medicine professionals are proposed.

No abstract

No abstract