RENEB/EURADOS field exercise 2019: robust dose estimation under outdoor conditions based on the dicentric chromosome assay

References

• Abend M, Badie C, Quintens R, Kriehuber R, Manning G, Macaeva E, Njima M, Oskamp D, Strunz S, Moertl S, et al. 2016. Examining radiation-induced in vivo and in vitro gene expression changes of the peripheral blood in different laboratories for biodosimetry purposes: first RENEB gene expression study. Radiat Res. 185(2):109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsbury EA, Badie C, Barnard S, Manning G, Moquet J, Abend M, Antunes AC, Barrios L, Bassinet C, Beinke C, et al. 2017. Integration of new biological and physical retrospective dosimetry methods into EU emergency response plans - joint RENEB and EURADOS inter-laboratory comparisons. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):99–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsbury EA, Lloyd DC. 2010. Dose estimation software for radiation biodosimetry. Health Phys. 98(2):290–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnard S, Ainsbury EA, Al-Hafidh J, Hadjidekova V, Hristova R, Lindholm C, Monteiro Gil O, Moquet J, Moreno M, Rossler U, et al. 2015. The first gamma-H2AX biodosimetry intercomparison exercise of the developing European biodosimetry network RENEB. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 164(3):265–270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Caballín MR, Miró R, Ribas M, Subias A, Egozcue J. 1995. Establishment and validation of a dose-effect curve for gamma-rays by cytogenetic analysis. Mutat Res. 326(1):65–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barquinero JF, Fattibene P, Chumak V, Ohba T, Della Monaca S, Nuccetelli C, Akahane K, Kurihara O, Kamiya K, Kumagai A, et al. 2021. Lessons from past radiation accidents: critical review of methods addressed to individual dose assessment of potentially exposed people and integration with medical assessment. Environ Int. 146:106175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassinet C, Woda C, Bortolin E, Della Monaca S, Fattibene P, Quattrini MC, Bulanek B, Ekendahl D, Burbidge CI, Cauwels V, et al. 2014. Retrospective radiation dosimetry using OSL of electronic components: results of an inter-laboratory comparison. Radiat Meas. 71:475–479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauchinger M, Schmid E, Dresp J. 1979. Calculation of the dose-rate dependence of the decentric yield after Co gamma-irradiation of human lymphocytes. Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med. 35(3):229–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beinke C, Ben-Shlomo A, Abend M, Port M. 2015. A case report: cytogenetic dosimetry after accidental radiation exposure during 192Ir industrial radiography testing. Radiat Res. 184(1):66–72.
   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(1):127–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brzozowska B, Ainsbury EA, Baert A, Beaton-Green L, Barrios L, Barquinero JF, Bassinet C, Beinke C, Benedek A, Beukes P, et al. 2017. RENEB accident simulation exercise. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):75–80.
   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, et al. 2007. CABAS: a freely available PC program for fitting calibration curves in chromosome aberration dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 124(2):115–123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depuydt J, Baeyens A, Barnard S, Beinke C, Benedek A, Beukes P, Buraczewska I, Darroudi F, De Sanctis S, Dominguez I, et al. 2017. RENEB intercomparison exercises analyzing micronuclei (cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay). Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):36–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Giorgio M, Barquinero JF, Vallerga MB, Radl A, Taja MR, 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(5):638–649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmiger R, Schanz U, Ott B, Frei D. 2018. Exposure of a service technician repairing a biplane X-ray system. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 182(1):18–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fattibene P, Trompier F, Wieser A, Brai M, Ciesielski B, De Angelis C, Della Monaca S, Garcia T, Gustafsson H, Hole EO, et al. 2014. EPR dosimetry intercomparison using smart phone touch screen glass. Radiat Environ Biophys. 53(2):311–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fattibene P, Wieser A, Adolfsson E, Benevides LA, Brai M, Callens F, Chumak V, Ciesielski B, Della Monaca S, Emerich K, et al. 2011. The 4th international comparison on EPR dosimetry with tooth enamel. Radiat Meas. 46(9):765–771.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregoire E, Ainsbury EA, Barrios L, Bassinet C, Fattibene P, Kulka U, Oestreicher U, Pantelias G, Terzoudi G, Trompier F, et al. 2017. The harmonization process to set up and maintain an operational biological and physical retrospective dosimetry network: QA QM applied to the RENEB network. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):81–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregoire E, Barquinero JF, Gruel G, Benadjaoud M, Martinez JS, Beinke C, Balajee A, Beukes P, Blakely WF, Dominguez I, et al. 2021. RENEB InterLaboratory comparison 2017; limits and pitfalls of ILCs. Int J Radiat Biol. 1–18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2021.1928782
   Google Scholar
• Güçlü I. 2021. Cytogenetic follow-up of an individual after accidental exposure to industrial radiation using dicentric frequency in blood lymphocytes. Mutat Res. 861–862:503276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gumrich K, Virsip-Peuckert RP, Harder D. 1985. Temperature and the formation of radiation-induced chromosome aberrations. I. The effect of irradiation temperature. Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med. 49:665–672.
   Google Scholar
• Hall J, Jeggo PA, West C, Gomolka M, Quintens R, Badie C, Laurent O, Aerts A, Anastasov N, Azimzadeh O, et al. 2017. Ionizing radiation biomarkers in epidemiological studies – an update. Rev Mut Res. 771:59–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernández A, Barquinero JF, Endesfelder D, Puig P, Barrios L, Einbeck J, Benadjaoud A, Aisnbury E. 2019. Biodose tools. Department of Animal Biology, Plant Biology and Ecology Building C, Faculty of Biosciences 08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona). [accessed 2019 Nov]. https://aldomann.shinyapps.io/biodose-tools-beta/_w_7bf9e171/_w_b69c9547/
   Google Scholar
• Hoshi M, Toyoda S, Ivannikov A, Zhumadilov K, Fukumura A, Apsalikov K, Zhumadilov ZS, Bayankin S, Chumak V, Ciesielski B, et al. 2007. Interlaboratory comparison of tooth enamel dosimetry on Semipalatinsk region: part 1, general view. Radiat Meas. 42(6–7):1005–1014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IAEA. 2001. Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy an international code of practice for dosimetry based on standards of absorbed dose to water. Vienna (Austria): IAEA. Technical Report Series 398.
   Google Scholar
• IAEA. 2011. Cytogenetic dosimetry: applications in prepardness for and response to radiation emergencies. Vienna (Austria): EPR-Biodosimetry, International Atomic Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• ICRU. 2019. Methods for Initial-Phase Assessment of Individual Doses Following Acute Exposures to Ionizing Radiation. Bethesta (MD): International Commission on Radiation Units. Report No. 94.
   Google Scholar
• ISO13304. 2020a. Radiological protection—minimum criteria for electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy for retrospective dosimetry of ionizing radiation—part 1: general principles. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO13304. 2020b. Radiological protection—minimum criteria for electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy for retrospective dosimetry of ionizing radiation—part 2: ex vivo human tooth enamel dosimetry. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO13528. 2015. Statistical methods for use in proficiency testing by interlaboratory comparison. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO17099. 2014. Radiological protection—performance criteria for laboratories using the cytokinesis block micronucleus (CBMN) assay in peripheral blood lymphocytes for biological dosimetry. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO19238. 2014. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), radiation protection performance criteria for service laboratories performing biological dosimetry by cytogenetics. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO20046. 2019. Radiological protection—performance criteria for laboratories using Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) translocation assay for assessment of exposure to ionizing radiation. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO21243. 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 (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO4037-3. 2019. Radiological protection — X and gamma reference radiation for calibrating dosemeters and doserate meters and for determining their response as a function of photon energy—part 3: calibration of area and personal dosemeters and the measurement of their response as a function of energy and angle of incidence. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO5725. 1998. Precision of test methods-determination of repeatability & reproducibility for a standard test method by interlaboratory tests. Geneva (Switzerland): ISO.
   Google Scholar
• Ivannikov A, Toyoda S, Hoshi M, Zhumadilov K, Fukumura A, Apsalikov K, Zhumadilov Z, Bayankin S, Chumak V, Ciesielski B, et al. 2007. Interlaboratory comparison of tooth enamel dosimetry on Semipalatinsk region: part 2, effects of spectrum processing. Radiat Meas. 42(6–7):1015–1020.
   Web of Science ®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 Prot Dosimetry. 164(1–2):165–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Abend M, Ainsbury EA, Badie C, Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Beinke C, Bortolin E, Cucu A, De Amicis A, et al. 2017. RENEB - running the European network of biological dosimetry and physical retrospective dosimetry. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):2–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Wojcik A. 2017. Special issue: networking in biological and EPR/OSL dosimetry: the European RENEB platform for emergency preparedness and research. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Wojcik A, Di Giorgio M, Wilkins R, Suto Y, Jang S, Quing-Jie L, Jiaxiang L, Ainsbury EA, Woda C, et al. 2018. Biodosimetry and biodosimetry networks for managing radiation emergency. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 182(1):128–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lea DE, Catcheside DG. 1942. The mechanism of the induction by radiation of chromosome aberrations in Tradescantia. J Genetics. 44(2–3):216–245.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Prosser JS, Corp MJ. 1984. The dose response relationship obtained at constant irradiation times for the induction of chromosome aberrations in human lymphocytes by cobalt-60 gamma rays. Radiat Environ Biophys. 23(3):179–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloyd DC, Purrott RJ, Dolphin GW. 1973. Chromosome aberration dosimetry using human lymphocytes in simulated partial body irradiation. Phys Med Biol. 18(3):421–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manning G, Macaeva E, Majewski M, Kriehuber R, Brzóska K, Abend M, Doucha-Senf S, Oskamp D, Strunz S, Quintens R, et al. 2017. Comparable dose estimates of blinded whole blood samples are obtained independently of culture conditions and analytical approaches. Second RENEB gene expression study. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):87–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moquet J, Barnard S, Staynova A, Lindholm C, Monteiro Gil O, Martins V, Rößler U, Vral A, Vandevoorde C, Wojewódzka M, et al. 2017. The second gamma-H2AX assay inter-comparison exercise carried out in the framework of the European biodosimetry network (RENEB). Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):58–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oestreicher U, Endesfelder D, Gomolka M, Kesminiene A, Lang P, Lindholm C, Rößler U, Samaga D, Kulka U. 2018. Automated scoring of dicentric chromosomes differentiates increased radiation sensitivity of young children after low dose CT exposure in vitro. Int J Radiat Biol. 94(11):1017–1026.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oestreicher U, Samaga D, Ainsbury E, Antunes AC, Baeyens A, Barrios L, Beinke C, Beukes P, Blakely WF, Cucu A, et al. 2017. RENEB intercomparisons applying the conventional Dicentric Chromosome Assay (DCA). Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):20–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pujol M, Barrios L, Puig P, Caballin MR, Barquinero JF. 2016. A new model for biological dose assessment in cases of heterogeneous exposures to ionizing radiation. Radiat Res. 185(2):151–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rojas Palma C, Woda C, Discher M, Steinhausler F. 2020. On the use of retrospective dosimetry to assist in the radiological triage of mass casualties exposed to ionizing radiation. J Radiol Prot. doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/abc181
   Google Scholar
• Romm H, Ainsbury EA, Barnard S, Barrios L, Barquinero JF, Beinke C, Deperas M, Gregoire E, Koivistoinen A, Lindholm C, et al. 2013. Automatic scoring of dicentric chromosomes as a tool in large scale radiation accidents. Mutat Res. 756(1–2):174–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romm H, Ainsbury EA, Barquinero JF, Barrios L, Beinke C, Cucu A, Domene MM, Filippi S, Monteiro Gil O, Gregoire E, et al. 2017. Web based scoring is useful for validation and harmonisation of scoring criteria within RENEB. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):110–117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rühm W, Bottollier-Depois JF, Gilvin P, Harrison R, Knežević Ž, Lopez MA, Tanner R, Vargas A, Woda C. 2018. The work programme of EURADOS on internal and external dosimetry. Ann Icrp. 47(3–4):20–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tawn EJ, Curwen GB, Riddell AE. 2018. Chromosome aberrations in workers occupationally exposed to tritium. J Radiol Prot. 38(2):N9–N16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terzoudi GI, Pantelias G, Darroudi F, Barszczewska K, Buraczewska I, Depuydt J, Georgieva D, Hadjidekova V, Hatzi VI, Karachristou I, et al. 2017. Dose assessment intercomparisons within the RENEB network using G0-lymphocyte prematurely condensed chromosomes (PCC assay). Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):48–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trompier F, Baumann M, Barrios L, Gregoire E, Abend M, Ainsbury EA, Barnard S, Barquinero JF, Bautista JA, Brzozowska B, et al. 2016. Investigation of the influence of calibration practices on cytogenetic laboratory performance for dose estimation. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):118–126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trompier F, Burbidge C, Bassinet C, Baumann M, Bortolin E, De Angelis C, Eakins J, Della Monaca S, Fattibene P, Quattrini MC, et al. 2016. Overview of physical dosimetry methods for triage application integrated in the new European network RENEB. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):65–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaurijoux A, Gruel G, Pouzoulet F, Gregoire E, Martin C, Roch-Lefevre S, Voisin P, Voisin P, Roy L. 2009. Strategy for population triage based on dicentric analysis. Radiat Res. 171(5):541–548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldner L, Bernhardsson C, Woda C, Trompier F, Van Hoey O, Kulka U, Oestreicher U, Bassinet C, Raaf C, Discher M, et al. 2021. The 2019-2020 EURADOS WG10 and RENEB field test of retrospective dosimetry methods in a small-scale incident involving ionizing radiation. Radiat Res. 195(3):253–264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wernli C, Eikenberg J, Marzocchi O, Breustedt B, Oestreicher U, Romm H, Gregoratto D, Marsh J. 2015. 30-y follow-up of a Pu/Am inhalation case. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 164(1–2):57–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wieser A, Debuyst R, Fattibene P, Meghzifene A, Onori S, Bayankin SN, Blackwell B, Brik A, Bugay A, Chumak V, et al. 2005. The 3rd international intercomparison on EPR tooth dosimetry: part 1, general analysis. Appl Radiat Isot. 62(2):163–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wieser A, Debuyst R, Fattibene P, Meghzifene A, Onori S, Bayankin SN, Brik A, Bugay A, Chumak V, Ciesielski B, et al. 2006. The third international intercomparison on EPR tooth dosimetry: part 2, final analysis. Rad Protect Dosimet. 120(1–4):176–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkins RC, Beaton-Green LA, Lachapelle S, Kutzner BC, Ferrarotto C, Chauhan V, Marro L, Livingston GK, Boulay Greene H, Flegal FN. 2015. Evaluation of the annual Canadian biodosimetry network intercomparisons. Int J Radiat Biol. 91(5):443–451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkins RC, Romm H, Kao T-C, Awa AA, Yoshida MA, Livingston GK, Jenkins MS, Oestreicher U, Pellmar TC, Prasanna PGS. 2008. Interlaboratory comparison of the dicentric chromosome assay for radiation biodosimetry in mass casualty events. Radiat Res. 169(5):551–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojcik A, Oestreicher U, Barrios L, Vral A, Terzoudi G, Ainsbury EA, Rothkamm K, Trompier F, Kulka U. 2017. The RENEB operational basis: complement of established biodosimetric assays. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(1):15–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar