> Details

Port, M. [Author]; Barquinero, J-F. [Author]; Alkebsi, L. [Author]; Amundson, S. A. [Author]; Badie, C. [Author]; Baeyens, A. [Author]; Balajee, A. S. [Author]; Balázs, K. [Author]; Barnard, S. [Author]; Bassinet, C. [Author]; Beaton-Green, L. A. [Author]; Beinke, C. [Author]; Endesfelder, D. [Author]; Bobyk, L. [Author]; Brochard, P. [Author]; Ciesielski, B. [Author]; Cuceu, C. [Author]; Discher, M. [Author]; D,Oca, M. C. [Author]; Domínguez, I. [Author]; Doucha-Senf, S. [Author]; Dumitrescu, A. [Author]; Duy, P. N. [Author]; Moquet, J. [Author]; [...]

RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2021: Inter-Assay Comparison of Eight Dosimetry Assays

Reference
management

Bookmarks

Remove from
bookmarks

Share this on Whatsapp

Close

Bookmarks



You can manage bookmarks using lists, please log in to your user account for this.
  • Media type: E-Article
  • Title: RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2021: Inter-Assay Comparison of Eight Dosimetry Assays
  • Contributor: Port, M. [Author]; Barquinero, J-F. [Author]; Alkebsi, L. [Author]; Amundson, S. A. [Author]; Badie, C. [Author]; Baeyens, A. [Author]; Balajee, A. S. [Author]; Balázs, K. [Author]; Barnard, S. [Author]; Bassinet, C. [Author]; Beaton-Green, L. A. [Author]; Beinke, C. [Author]; Endesfelder, D. [Author]; Bobyk, L. [Author]; Brochard, P. [Author]; Ciesielski, B. [Author]; Cuceu, C. [Author]; Discher, M. [Author]; D,Oca, M. C. [Author]; Domínguez, I. [Author]; Doucha-Senf, S. [Author]; Dumitrescu, A. [Author]; Duy, P. N. [Author]; Moquet, J. [Author]; [...]
  • Published: Radiation Research Society, 2023
  • Published in: Radiation research 199(6), 535-555 (2023). doi:10.1667/RADE-22-00207.1
  • Language: English
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1667/RADE-22-00207.1; https://doi.org/10.34734/FZJ-2023-03096
  • ISSN: 1938-5404; 0033-7587
  • Origination:
  • University thesis:
  • Footnote: Diese Datenquelle enthält auch Bestandsnachweise, die nicht zu einem Volltext führen.
  • Description: Tools for radiation exposure reconstruction are required to support the medical management of radiation victims in radiological or nuclear incidents. Different biological and physical dosimetry assays can be used for various exposure scenarios to estimate the dose of ionizing radiation a person has absorbed. Regular validation of the techniques through inter-laboratory comparisons (ILC) is essential to guarantee high quality results. In the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison, the performance quality of established cytogenetic assays [dicentric chromosome assay (DCA), cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN), stable chromosomal translocation assay (FISH) and premature chromosome condensation assay (PCC)] was tested in comparison to molecular biological assays [gamma-H2AX foci (gH2AX), gene expression (GE)] and physical dosimetry-based assays [electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), optically or thermally stimulated luminescence (LUM)]. Three blinded coded samples (e.g., blood, enamel or mobiles) were exposed to 0, 1.2 or 3.5 Gy X-ray reference doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min). These doses roughly correspond to clinically relevant groups of unexposed to low exposed (0-1 Gy), moderately exposed (1-2 Gy, no severe acute health effects expected) and highly exposed individuals (>2 Gy, requiring early intensive medical care). In the frame of the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison, samples were sent to 86 specialized teams in 46 organizations from 27 nations for dose estimation and identification of three clinically relevant groups. The time for sending early crude reports and more precise reports was documented for each laboratory and assay where possible. The quality of dose estimates was analyzed with three different levels of granularity, 1. by calculating the frequency of correctly reported clinically relevant dose categories, 2. by determining the number of dose estimates within the uncertainty intervals recommended for triage dosimetry (±0.5 Gy or ±1.0 Gy for doses <2.5 Gy or >2.5 Gy), and 3. by ...
  • Access State: Open Access