Biodose Tools: an R shiny application for biological dosimetry

References

• Abend M, Amundson SA, Badie C, Brzoska K, Hargitai R, Kriehuber R, Schüle S, Kis E, Ghandhi SA, Lumniczky K, et al. 2021. Inter-laboratory comparison of gene expression biodosimetry for protracted radiation exposures as part of the RENEB and EURADOS WG10 2019 exercise. Sci Rep. 11(1):9756.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsbury EA, Barquinero JF. 2009. Biodosimetric tools for a fast triage of people accidentally exposed to ionizing radiation. Statistical and computational aspects. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 45(3):307–312.
   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
• Ainsbury EA, Vinnikov VA, Puig P, Higueras M, Maznyk NA, Lloyd DC, Rothkamm K. 2014. Review of bayesian statistical analysis methods for cytogenetic radiation biodosimetry, with a practical example. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 162(3):185–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allaire JJ, Xie Y, McPherson J, Luraschi J, Ushey K, Atkins A, Wickham H, Cheng J, Chang W, Iannone R. 2022. rmarkdown: dynamic documents for R. https://github.com/rstudio/rmarkdown.
   Google Scholar
• Bache SM, Wickham H. 2022. magrittr: a forward-pipe operator for R. https://magrittr.tidyverse.org.
   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 γ-rays by cytogenetic analysis. Mutat Res. 326(1):65–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauchinger M, Schmid E. 1973. Chromosome aberrations in human lymphocytes after X-irradiation in vitro II. Analysis of primary processes in the formation of dicentric chromosomes. Mutat Res. 20(1):107–113.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bauchinger M, Schmid E, Dresp J. 1979. Calculation of the dose-rate dependence of the dicentric yield after co γ-irradiation of human lymphocytes. Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med. 35(3):229–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benaglia T, Chauveau D, Hunter DR, Young D. 2009. mixtools : an R package for analyzing finite mixture models. J Stat Softw. 32(6):1–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brame RS, Groer PG. 2002. Bayesian analysis of overdispersed chromosome aberration data with the negative binomial model. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 102(2):115–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz. 1996. MLREG: ML-regression [CD-ROM]. Version 2.0.
   Google Scholar
• Chang W, Borges Ribeiro B. 2021. shinydashboard: create dashboards with shiny. http://rstudio.github.io/shinydashboard/.
   Google Scholar
• Chang W, Cheng J, Allaire JJ, Sievert C, Schloerke B, Xie Y, Allen J, McPherson J, Dipert A, Borges B. 2022. Shiny: web application framework for R. https://shiny.rstudio.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Csárdi G. 2022. Cli: helpers for developing command line interfaces. https://cli.r-lib.org.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl DB, Scott D, Roosen C, Magnusson A, Swinton J. 2019. xtable: export tables to LaTeX or HTML. http://xtable.r-forge.r-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Darroudi F, Fomina J, Meijers M, Natarajan AT. 1998. Kinetics of the formation of chromosome aberrations in X-irradiated human lymphocytes, using PCC and FISH. Mutat Res Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen. 404(1–2):55–65.
   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
• Dolphin GW, International Atomic Energy Agency. 1969. Biological dosimetry with particular reference to chromosome aberration analysis: a review of methods. In Handling of radiation accidents. International Atomic Energy Agency, ST1/PUB/229, Vienna, Austria; p. 215–224.
   Google Scholar
• Duran A, Barquinero JF, Caballín MR, Ribas M, Puig P, Egozcue J, Barrios L. 2002. Suitability of FISH painting techniques for the detection of partial-body irradiations for biological dosimetry. Radiat Res. 157(4):461–468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durante M, Furusawa Y, Gotoh E. 1998. Technical report a simple method for simultaneous interphase-metaphase chromosome analysis in biodosimetry. Int J Radiat Biol. 74(4):457–462.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durante M, George K, Yang TC. 1996. Biological dosimetry by interphase chromosome painting. Radiat Res. 145(1):53–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards AA, Lloyd DC, Purrott RJ. 1979. Radiation induced chromosome aberrations and the Poisson distribution. Radiat Environ Biophys. 16(2):89–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards AA, Lloyd DC, Purrott RJ. 1980. Dicentric chromosome aberration yield in human lymphocytes and radiation quality; a resume including recent results using alpha-particles. In: Booz J, Ebert HG, Hartfiel HD, editors. Seventh Symposium on Microdosimetry. Harwood Academic Publishers; pp. 1263–1273. Report EUR7147.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards AA. 1978. The estimation of dose and its uncertainty. In: Lloyd DC, Purrott RJ, Prosser JS, Edwards AA, Dolphin GW, White AD, Reeder EJ, White CM, Copper SJ, Stephenson BD, Tipper PA, editors. NRPB-R 70, doses in radiation accidents investigated by chromosome aberration analysis, VIII A review of cases investigated: 1977. Didcot, Oxon: National Radiation Protection Board; p. 16–17.
   Google Scholar
• Einbeck J, Ainsbury EA, Sales R, Barnard S, Kaestle F, Higueras M. 2018. A statistical framework for radiation dose estimation with uncertainty quantification from the γ-H2AX assay. PLOS One. 13(11):e0207464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endesfelder D, Kulka U, Einbeck J, Oestreicher U. 2020. Improving the accuracy of dose estimates from automatically scored dicentric chromosomes by accounting for chromosome number. Int J Radiat Biol. 96(12):1571–1584.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endesfelder D, Oestreicher U, Kulka U, Ainsbury EA, Moquet J, Barnard S, Gregoire E, Martinez JS, Trompier F, Ristic Y, et al. 2021. RENEB/EURADOS field exercise 2019: robust dose estimation under outdoor conditions based on the dicentric chromosome assay. Int J Radiat Biol. 97(9):1181–1198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fay C, Guyader V, Rochette S, Girard C. 2022. golem: a framework for robust shiny applications. https://github.com/ThinkR-open/golem.
   Google Scholar
• Fenech M. 1993. The cytokinesis-block micronucleus technique: a detailed description of the method and its application to genotoxicity studies in human populations. Mutat Res Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen. 285(1):35–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frome EL, DuFrain RJ. 1986. Maximum likelihood estimation for cytogenetic dose-response curves. Biometrics. 42(1):73–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia LO, Zequera JT. 1996. Mathematical operations in cytogenetic dosimetry: Dosgen. Proceedings of the 3 Regional Meeting on Radiological and Nuclear Safety Radiological Protection in Latin America and the Caribbean. Cusco (Perú); p. 1207.
   Google Scholar
• González JE, Barquinero JF, Holladay BA, di Giorgio M, Higueras M. 2020. Uncertainty calculation methods in dose assessment for dicentric chromosome assay. Int J Radiat Biol. 96(5):606–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González JE, Holladay B, Higueras M, di Giorgio M, Barquinero JF. 2022. Assessment methods for inter-laboratory comparisons of the dicentric assay. Int J Radiat Biol. Jul. 20:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Henningsen A, Toomet O. 2011. maxLik: a package for maximum likelihood estimation in R. Comput Stat. 26(3):443–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry L, Wickham H. 2022. rlang: functions for base types and core R and Tidyverse features. https://rlang.r-lib.org.
   Google Scholar
• Higueras M, González JE, di Giorgio M, Barquinero JF. 2018. A note on Poisson goodness-of-fit tests for ionizing radiation induced chromosomal aberration samples. Int J Radiat Biol. 94(7):656–663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higueras M, Howes A, López-Fidalgo J. 2020. Optimal experimental design for cytogenetic dose-response calibration curves. Int J Radiat Biol. 96(7):894–902.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higueras M, Puig P, Ainsbury EA, Vinnikov VA, Rothkamm K. 2016. A new Bayesian model applied to cytogenetic partial body irradiation estimation. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 168(3):330–336.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IAEA. 2001. Cytogenetic analysis for radiation dose assessment, technical reports series No. 405. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• IAEA. 2011. Cytogenetic dosimetry: applications in preparedness for and response to radiation emergencies, EPR biodosimetry. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• ISO 19238. 2014. Radiological protection – performance criteria for service laboratories performing biological dosimetry by cytogenetics. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO 20046. 2019. Radiological protection – performance criteria for laboratories using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) translocation assay for assessment of exposure to ionizing radiation. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• 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
• Jackson CH. 2011. Multi-state models for panel data: the MSM package for R. J Stat Softw. 38(8):1–29.
   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. 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
• Lamport L. 1994. LaTeX: a document preparation system. 2nd ed. Boston (US): Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Lea DE, Catcheside DG. 1942. The mechanism of the induction by radiation of chromosome aberrations in Tradescantia. J Genet. 44(2–3):216–245.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Prosser JS, Corp MJ. 1984. The dose-effect 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, Edwards AA. 1983. Chromosome aberrations in human lymphocytes: effect of radiation quality, dose, and dose rate. In: Ishihara T, Sasaki M, editors. Radiation-induced chromosome damage in man. New York (NY): Alan R. Lis, Inc.; p. 23–49.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd DC, Purrott RJ, Reeder EJ. 1980. The incidence of unstable chromosome aberrations in peripheral blood lymphocytes from unirradiated and occupationally exposed people. Mutat Res Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen. 72(3):523–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucas JN, Awa A, Straume T, Poggensee M, Kodama Y, Nakano M, Ohtaki K, Weier H-U, Pinkel D, Gray J. 1992. Rapid translocation frequency analysis in humans decades after exposure to ionizing radiation. Int J Radiat Biol. 62(1):53–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucas JN, Deng W. 2000. Views on issues in radiation biodosimetry based on chromosome translocations measured by FISH. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 88(1):77–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyttle I. 2021. bsplus: adds functionality to the R Markdown + Shiny Bootstrap Framework. https://github.com/ijlyttle/bsplus.
   Google Scholar
• MacFarlane J. 2022. Pandoc: a universal document converter (2.19.2). https://pandoc.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Merkle W. 1983. Statistical methods in regression and calibration analysis of chromosome aberration data. Radiat Environ Biophys. 21(3):217–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moriña D, Higueras M, Puig P, Ainsbury EA, Rothkamm K. 2015. radir package: an R implementation for cytogenetic biodosimetry dose estimation. J Radiol Prot. 35(3):557–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morton NE. 1991. Parameters of the human genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 88(17):7474–7476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliveira M, Einbeck J, Higueras M, Ainsbury EA, Puig P, Rothkamm K. 2016. Zero-inflated regression models for radiation-induced chromosome aberration data: a comparative study. Biom J. 58(2):259–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen J. 2021. rhandsontable: interface to the Handsontable.js Library. http://jrowen.github.io/rhandsontable/.
   Google Scholar
• Papworth DG. 1975. Curve fitting by maximum likelihood. Radiat Bot. 15:127–140.
   Google Scholar
• Perrier V, Meyer F, Granjon D. 2022. shinyWidgets: custom inputs widgets for Shiny. https://github.com/dreamRs/shinyWidgets.
   Google Scholar
• Port M. 2021. RENEB inter-laboratory study on biological and physical dosimetry employing eight assays. Radiation Research Society’s 67th Annual Meeting, Virtual, United States.
   Google Scholar
• Puig P, Barquinero JF. 2011. An application of compound Poisson modelling to biological dosimetry. Proc Math Phys Eng Sci. 467:897–910.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pujol M, Barquinero JF, Puig P, Puig R, Caballín MR, Barrios L. 2014. A new model of biodosimetry to integrate low and high doses. PLOS One. 2;9(12):e114137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pujol M, Barrios L, Puig P, Caballín 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
• Pujol-Canadell M, Puig R, Armengol G, Barrios L, Barquinero JF. 2020. Chromosomal aberration dynamics through the cell cycle. DNA Repair. 89:102838.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. 2022. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.r-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Rao CR, Chakravarti IM. 1956. Some small sample tests of significance for a Poisson distribution. Biometrics. 12(3):264–282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasaki MS, Miyata H. 1968. Biological dosimetry in atomic bomb survivors. Nature. 220(5173):1189–1193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasaki MS. 2003. Chromosomal biodosimetry by unfolding a mixed Poisson distribution: a generalized model. Int J Radiat Biol. 79(2):83–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savage JRK, Papworth DG, Bauchinger M, Natarajan AT, Pantelias GE, Griffin CS, Figgitt M, Knehr S, Braselmann H, Darroudi F, et al. 2000. Constructing a 2B calibration curve for retrospective dose reconstruction. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 88(1):69–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savage JRK. 1970. Sites of radiation induced chromosome exchanges. Curr Top Radiat Res. 6:129–194.
   Google Scholar
• Sigurdson AJ, Ha M, Hauptmann M, Bhatti P, Sram RJ, Beskid O, Tawn EJ, Whitehouse CA, Lindholm C, Nakano M, et al. 2008. International study of factors affecting human chromosome translocations. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 652(2):112–121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szłuińska M, Edwards A, Lloyd D. 2005. Statistical methods for biological dosimetry HPA-RPD-011 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/biological-dosimetry-statistical-methods.
   Google Scholar
• Szłuińska M, Edwards A, Lloyd D. 2007. Presenting statistical uncertainty on cytogenetic dose estimates. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 123(4):443–449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trompier F, Baumann M, Barrios L, Gregoire E, Abend M, Ainsbury E, Barnard S, Barquinero JF, Bautista JA, Brzozowska B, et al. 2017. 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
• Venables WN, Ripley BD. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S. 4th ed. New York (NY): Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Virsik RP, Harder D. 1981. Statistical interpretation of the overdispersed distribution of radiation-induced dicentric chromosome aberrations at high LET. Radiat Res. 85(1):13–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vral A, Fenech M, Thierens H. 2011. The micronucleus assay as a biological dosimeter of in vivo ionising radiation exposure. Mutagenesis. 26(1):11–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan L, François R, Grolemund G, Hayes A, Henry L, Hester J, et al. 2019. Welcome to the Tidyverse. JOSS. 4(43):1686.
   Google Scholar
• Wickham H, François R, Henry L, Müller K. 2022. dplyr: a grammar of data manipulation. https://dplyr.tidyverse.org.
   Google Scholar
• Wickham H, Girlich M. 2022. tidyr: tidy messy data. https://tidyr.tidyverse.org.
   Google Scholar
• Wickham H. 2016. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar