RENEB intercomparisons applying the conventional Dicentric Chromosome Assay (DCA)

References

• Ainsbury EA, Lloyd DC. 2010. Dose estimation software for radiation biodosimetry. Health Phys. 98:290–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beinke C, Barnard S, Boulay-Greene H, De Amicis A, De Sanctis S, Herodin F, Jones A, Kulka U, Lista F, Lloyd D, et al. 2013. NATO Dosimetry Study – Laboratory intercomparison of the dicentric chromosome analysis. Radiat Res. 180:129–137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blakely WF, Carr Z, Chu MC, Dayal-Drager R, Fujimoto K, Hopmeir M, Kulka U, Lillis-Hearne P, Livingston GK, Lloyd DC, et al. 2009. WHO 1st consultation on the development of a global biodosimetry laboratories network for radiation emergencies BioDoseNet). Radiat Res. 171:127–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Amicis A, De Sanctis S, Di Cristofaro S, Franchini V, Regalbuto E, Mammana G, Lista F. 2014. Dose estimation using dicentric chromosome assay and cytokinesis block micronucleus assay: comparison between manual and automated scoring in triage mode. Health Phys. 106:787–797.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deperas J, Szluinska M, Deperas-Kaminska M, Edwards A, Lloyd D, Lindholm C, Romm H, Roy L, Moss R, Morand J, Wojcik A. 2007. CABAS: a freely available PC program for fitting calibration curves in chromosome aberration dosimetry. Radiat Protect Dosim. 124:115–123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Giorgio M, Barquinero JF, Vallerga MB, Radl A, Taja AR, Seoane A, De Luca J, Oliveira MS, Valdivia P, Lima OG, et al. 2011. Biological dosimetry intercomparison exercise: an evaluation of triage and routine mode results by robust methods. Radiat Res. 175:638–649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flegal FN, Devantier Y, McNamee JP, Wilkins RC. 2010. Quickscan dicentric chromosome analysis for radiation biodosimetry. Health Phys. 98:276–281.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregoire E, Kulka U, Barrios L, Ainsbury E, Bassinet C, Fattibene P, Oestreicher U, Pantelias, G, Terzoudi G, Trompier F, et al. 2016. The harmonization process to set up and maintain an operational biological dosimetry and physical retrospective dosimetry network: QA QM applied to the RENEB network. Int J Rad Biol. 92, in this issue. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1206232.
   Google Scholar
• International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 2011. Cytogenetic dosimetry: applications in preparedness for and response to radiation emergencies. EPR-biodosimetry. Vienna, Austria: IAEA.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 19238. 2014. Radiation protection-performance criteria for service laboratories performing biological dosimetry by cytogenetics. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 21243. 2008. Radiation protection – performance criteria for laboratories performing cytogenetic triage for assessment of mass casualties in radiological or nuclear emergencies – general principles and application to dicentric assay. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 13528. 2005. Statistical methods for use in proficiency testing by interlaboratory comparisons. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 5725. 1998. Precision of test methods – determination of repeatability & reproducibility for a standard test method by interlaboratory tests. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• Jaworska A, Ainsbury EA, Fattibene P, Lindholm C, Oestreicher U, Rothkamm K, Romm H, Thierens H, Trompier F, Voisin P, et al. 2015. Operational guidance for radiation emergency response organisations in Europe for using biodosimetric tools developed in EU MULTIBIODOSE project. Radiat Protect Dosim. 164:1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Ainsbury L, Atkinson M, Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Beinke C, Bognar G, Cucu A, Darroudi F, Fattibene P, et al. 2012. Realising the European Network of Biodosimetry (RENEB). Radiat Protect Dosim. 151:621–625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Ainsbury L, Atkinson M, Barnard S, Smith R, Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Bassinet C, Beinke C, Cucu A, et al. 2015. Realising the European network of biodosimetry: RENEB-Status Quo. Radiat Protect Dosim. 164:42–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Abend M, Ainsbury E, Badie C, Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Beinke C, Bortolin E, Cucu A, De Amicis A, et al. 2016. RENEB – Running the European Network of biological dosimetry and physical retrospective dosimetry. Int J Rad Biol, in this issue. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1230239.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Moquet JE, Guerrero-Carbajal YC. 2000. The role of cytogenetics in early triage of radiation casualties. Appl Radiat Isot. 52:1107–1112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsubara DC, Sasaki MS, Adachi T. 1974. Dose-response relationship of lymphocyte chromosome aberrations in locally irradiated persons J Radiat Res (Tokyo). 15:189–196.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MULTIBIODOSE. 2012. Multi-disciplinary biodosimetric tools to manage high scale radiological casualties (MULTIBIODOSE) [online]. Available at: www.multibiodose.eu. Accessed 4 April 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Romm H, Oestreicher U, Kulka U. 2009. Cytogenetic damage analysed by the dicentric assay. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 45:251–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romm H, Wilkins RC, Coleman CN, Lillis-Hearne PK, Pellmar TC, Livingston GK, Awa AA, Jenkins MS, Yoshida MA, Oestreicher U, Prasanna PG. 2011. Biological dosimetry by the triage dicentric chromosome assay: potential implications for treatment of acute radiation syndrome in radiological mass casualties. Radiat Res. 175:397–404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romm H, Ainsbury E, Bajinskis A, Barnard S, Barquinero JF, Beinke C, Puig-Casanovas R, Deperas-Kaminska M, Gregoire E, Kulka U, et al. 2012. The dicentric assay in triage mode as a reliable biodosimetric scoring strategy for population triage in large scale radiation accidents. Glasgow: IRPA13, Available at: http://www.irpa.net/page.asp?id=54606 TS2.C3. Accessed 29 February 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Romm H, Ainsbury E, Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Beinke C, Cucu A, Domene M, Filippi S, Monteiro Gil O, Gregoire E, et al. 2016. Web based scoring is useful for validation and harmonisation of scoring criteria within RENEB. Int J Radiat Biol, in this issue. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1206228.
   Google Scholar
• Trompier F, Baumann M, Barrios L, Gregoire E, Abend M, Ainsbury E, Barnard S, Barquinero JF, Bautista JA, Perez-Calatayud J, et al. 2016. Investigation of the influence of calibration practices on cytogenetic laboratory performance for dose estimation. Int J Radiat Biol, in this issue. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1213455.
   Google Scholar
• Voisin P, Roy L, Benderitter M. 2004. Why can’t we find a better biological indicator of dose? Radiat Protect Dosim. 112:465–469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkins RC, Romm H, Kao TC, Awa AA, Yoshida MA, Livingston GK, Jenkins MS, Oestreicher U, Pellmar TC, Prasanna PG. 2008. Interlaboratory comparison of the dicentric chromosome assay for radiation biodosimetry in mass casualty events. Radiat Res. 169:551–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkins RC, Romm H, Oestreicher U, Marro L, Yoshida MA, Suto Y, Prasanna PG. 2011. Biological dosimetry by the triage dicentric chromosome assay – further validation of international networking Radiat Measure. 46:923–928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojcik A, Oestreicher U, Barrios L, Vral A, Terzoudi G, Ainsburry E, Rothkamm K, Trompier F, Kulka U. 2016. The RENEB operational basis: complement of established biodosimetric assays. Int J Rad Biol, in this issue. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1235296.
   Google Scholar