Mammogram and diagnostic X-rays–evidence of protective Bystander, Adaptive Response (AR) radio-protection and AR retention at high dose levels

References

• Attix F H. Introduction to radiological physics and radiation dosimetry. John Wiley and Sons, New York 1986
   Google Scholar
• Azzam E I, de Toledo S M, Gooding T, Little J B. Intercellular communication is involved in the bystander regulation of gene expression in human cells exposed to very low fluences of alpha particles. Radiation Research 1998; 150: 497–504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azzam E I, de Toledo S M, Raaphorst G P, Mitchell R E. Low-dose ionizing radiation decreases the frequency of neoplastic transformation to a low level below the spontaneous rate in C3H 10T1/2 Cells. Radiation Research 1996; 146: 369–373
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belyakov O V, Mitchell S A, Parikh D, Randers-Pherson G, Marino S A, Amundson S A, Geard C R, Brenner D J. Biological effects in unirradiated human tissue induced by radiation damage up to 1 mm away. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA. 2005; 102: 14203–14208
   Google Scholar
• Booz J. Symposium. Microdosimetry. Commission of the European Communities. EU Report No. 5848. 1978
   Google Scholar
• Brenner D J, Sawant S G, Hande M P, Miller R C, Elliston C D, FU Z, Randers- Pherson G, Matino S A. Routine screening mammography: How important is the radiation-risk side of the benefit-risk equation. International Journal of Radiation Biology 2002; 78: 1065–1067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dasu A, Denekamp J. Inducible repair and intrinsic radiosensitivity: A complex but predictable relationship. Radiation Research 2000; 153: 279–288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duke University. Radiation dose to the breast from mammography. Duke University Radiation Safety Division. Duke University and Duke Medicine Bulletin. 1997
   Google Scholar
• Ellett W H, Braby L A. The microdosimetry of 250 kVp and 65 kVp x rays, Co60 gamma rays and tritium beta particles. Radiation Research 1972; 51: 229–243
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmore E, Lao X-Y, Kapadia R, Giedzinski E, Limoli C, Redpath J L. Low doses of very low-dose-rate low-LET radiation suppress radiation-induced neoplastic transformation in vitro and induce adaptive response. Radiation Research 2008; 169: 311–318
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmore E, Lao X-Y, Kapadia R, Redpath J L. The effect of dose rate on radiation-induced neoplastic transformation in vitro by low doses of low-LET radiation. Radiation Research 2006; 166: 832–838
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmore E, Lao X-Y, Ko M, Rightnar S, Redpath J L. Neoplastic transformation in vitro induced by low doses of 232 MeV protons. International Journal of Radiation Biology 2005; 81: 291–297
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ennis E G, Ehlers P F. Notes on random chords in convex bodies. Journal of Applied Probability 1993; 30: 889–897
   Google Scholar
• Feinendegen L E, Polycove M, Neumann R D. Whole body responses to low-level radiation exposure: New concepts in mammalian radiobiology. Experimental Hemotology 2007; 35: 37–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemdal B, Herrnsdorf L, Andersson I, Bengtsson G, Heddson B, Olsson M. Average glandular dose in routine mammography screening using a Sectra Microdose Mammography unit. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005; 114: 436–443
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heyes G J, Mill A J. The neoplastic transformation potential of mammography X rays and atomic bomb spectrum radiation. Radiation Research 2004; 162: 120–127
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heyes G J, Mill A J, Charles M W. Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme. British Journal of Radiology 2006; 79: 195–200
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iyer R, Lehnert B E. Alpha-particle-induced increases in the radioresistance of normal human bystander cells. Radiation Research 2002; 157: 3–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones B, Dale R G, Deehan C, Hopkins K I, Morgan D A. The role of biological effective dose (BED) in clinical oncology. Clinical Oncology 2001; 13: 71–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellerer A M. Chord-length distributions and related quantities for spheroids. Radiation Research 1984; 98: 425–437
   Google Scholar
• Kellerer A M. Electron spectra and the RBE of X rays. Radiation Research 2002; 158: 13–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellerer A M. Error bands for the linear-quadratic dose-effect relation. Radiation and Environmental Biophysics 2003; 42: 77–85
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kellerer A M, Rossi H H. The theory of dual radiation action. Current topics in radiation research quarterly, Index Medicus, M Ebert, A Howard. North-Holland Publishers, AmsterdamThe Netherlands 1972; 8: 85–158
   Google Scholar
• Klein R, Aichinger H, Dierker J, Jansen J TM, Joite-Barfub S, Sabel M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Zoetelief J. Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients. Physics in Medicine and Biology 1997; 42: 651–671
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ko S J, Liao X-Y, Molloi S, Elmore E, Redpath J L. Neoplastic transformation in vitro after exposure to low doses of mammographic-energy X rays: Qualitative and mechanistic aspects. Radiation Research 2004; 162: 646–654
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruger R L, Schueler B A. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. Medical Physics 2001; 28: 1449–1454
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leonard B E. Adaptive response by single cell radiation hits – implications for nuclear workers. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005; 116: 387–391
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard B E. Adaptive response and human risks: Part I – A microdosimetry dose dependent model. International Journal of Radiation Biology 2007a; 83: 115–131
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard B E. Adaptive response: Part II – Modeling for dose rate and time influences. International Journal of Radiation Biology 2007b; 83: 395–409
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard B E. A composite microdose adaptive response (AR) and bystander effect (BE) model – application to low LET and high LET AR and BE data. International Journal of Radiation Biology 84:681–701 2008
   Google Scholar
• Liu Z, Mothersill C E, McNeill F E, Lyng F M, Byun S H, Seymour C B, Prestwich W V. A dose threshold for a medium transfer bystander effect for a human skin cell line. Radiation Research 2006; 166: 19–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marples B, Wouters B G, Collis S J, Chalmers A J, Joiner M C. Review – low-dose hyper-radiosensitivity: A consequence of ineffective cell cycle arrest of radiation damaged G2-phase cells. Radiation Research 2004; 161: 247–255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller R C, Randers-Pehrson G, Geard C R, Hall E J, Brenner D J. The oncogenic transforming potential of the passage of single α particles through mammalian cell nuclei. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 1999; 96: 19–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchel R EJ. The bystander effect: Recent developments and implications for understanding the dose response. Nonlinearity in Biology, Toxiciology and Medicine 2004; 2: 173–183
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mitchel R EJ, Jackson J S, Carlisle. Upper dose threshold for radiation-induced adaptive response against cancer in high-dose exposed, cancer-prone, radiation-sensitive Trp53 heterozygous mice. Radiation Research 2004; 162: 20–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan W F. Will radiation-induced bystander effects or adaptive responses impact on the shape of the dose response relationships at low doses of ionizing radiation. Dose-Response 2006; 4: 257–262
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mothersill C, Seymour C B. Medium from irradiated human epithelial cells but not human fibroblasts reduces the clonogenic survival of unirradiated cells. International Journal of Radiation Biology 1997; 71: 421–427
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mothersill C, Seymour C B. Cell-cell contact during gamma irradiation is not required to induce a bystander effect in normal human keratinocytes: Evidence of a signal controlling survival into the medium. Radiation Research 1998; 149: 256–262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mothersill C, Seymour C B. Radiation-induced bystander effects: Are they good, bad or both? Medicine. Conflict and Survival 2005; 21: 101–110
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mourad W G. Average glandular dose in FDA-approved FFDM systems. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Bulletin. Department of Health and Human Services. 2005
   Google Scholar
• Papworth D G. 5. Appendix. Curve fitting by maximum likelihood. Radiation-induced chromosomal aberrations in tradescantia. Radiation Botany, Savage RK, 1975; 15: 127–140
   Google Scholar
• Redpath J L. Health risks of low photon energy imaging. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2007; 122: 528–533
   Google Scholar
• Redpath J L, Elmore E. Radiation-induced neoplastic transformation in vitro, hormesis and risk assessment. Dose-Response Journal 2007; 5: 123–130
   Google Scholar
• Redpath J L, Liang D, Taylor T H, Cristie C, Elmore E. The shape of the dose-response curve for radiation-induced neoplastic transformation in vitro: Evidence for an adaptive response against neoplastic transformation at low doses of low-LET radiation. Radiation Research 2001; 156: 700–707
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redpath J L, Lu Q, Lao X, Molloi S, Elmore E. Low doses of diagnostic X-rays protect against neoplastic transformation in vitro. International Journal of Radiation Biology 2003; 79: 235–240
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redpath J L, Mitchel R EJ. Letter to Editor: Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme. British Journal of Radiology 2006; 79: 854–855
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rossi H H, Zaider M. Radiogenic lung cancer, the effects of low doses of low linear energy transfer (LET) radiation. Radiation and Environmental Biophysics 1997; 36: 85–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadley J D, Afzal V, Wolff S. Characterization of the adaptive response to ionizing radiation induced by low doses of X rays to human lymphocytes. Radiation Research 1987; 111: 511–517
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadley J K, Wiencke J K. Induction of the adaptive response by X-rays is dependent on radiation intensity. International Journal of Radiation Biology 1989; 56: 107–118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schollnberger H, Ecki P M. Protective bystander effects simulated with the state-vector model. Dose-Response Journal 2007; 5: 187–203
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wiencke J K, Afzal V, Oliveri G, Wolff S. Evidence That [3H] Thymidine-induced adaptive response of human lymphocytes to subsequent doses of x-ray involves the induction of a chromosomal repair mechanism. Mutagenesis 1986; 1: 375–380
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar