Radiation and Environmental Biophysics

, Volume 49, Issue 2, pp 281–291 | Cite as

Early hematopoiesis inhibition under chronic radiation exposure in humans

  • Alexander V. Akleyev
  • Igor V. Akushevich
  • Georgy P. Dimov
  • Galina A. Veremeyeva
  • Tatyana A. Varfolomeyeva
  • Svetlana V. Ukraintseva
  • Anatoly I. Yashin
Original Paper


The major goal of this study was to identify and quantitatively describe the association between the characteristics of chronic (low-dose rate) exposure to (low LET) ionizing radiation and cellularity of peripheral blood cell lines. About 3,200 hemograms (i.e., spectra of blood counts) obtained over the years of maximal exposure to ionizing radiation (1950–1956) for inhabitants of the Techa River were used in analyses. The mean cumulative red bone marrow dose (with standard errors), calculated using Techa River Dosimetry System-2000, was 333.6 ± 4.6 mGy (SD = 259.9 mGy, max = 1151 mGy) to the year 1956. The statistical approach included both empirical methods for estimating frequencies of cytopenic states of the investigated blood cell lines (e.g. neutrophile, platelets, erythrocyte, etc.), and regression methods, including generalized linear models and logistic regressions which allowed taking into account confounding factors (e.g., attained age, age at maximal exposure, presence of concomitant diseases, and demographic characteristics). The results of the analyses demonstrated hematopoiesis inhibition manifested by a decrease in peripheral blood cellularity and an increase in the frequency of cytopenia in all blood cell lines (leukocytes, including lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophiles, as well as platelets and erythrocytes). The intensity of hematopoiesis inhibition in the period of maximal exposures is determined by the combined influence of the dose rate and cumulative dose. The contribution of specific confounding factors was quantified and shown to be much less important than dose characteristics. The best predictor among dose characteristics was identified for each blood cell line. A 2-fold increase in dose rate is assumed to be a characteristic of radiosensitivity and a quantitative characteristic of the effect.


  1. Akleyev A, Varfolomeyeva T (2007) Dynamics of blood cell composition in residents of the Techa riverside villages. Acta Med Nagasaki 52:19–28Google Scholar
  2. Akleyev AV, Veremeyeva GA, Silkina LA, Vozilova AV (1999) Long-term hemopoiesis and immunity status after chronic radiation exposure of red bone marrow in humans Centre. Eur J Occup Environ Med 5:113–129Google Scholar
  3. All-Russia Population Census (2002) Basic result. Federal State Statistics Service. http://www.perepis2002.ru/index.html?id=86. Accessed Nov 2008
  4. Anspaugh LR, Degteva MO, Vorobiova MI (2006) Dosimetry for members of the extended Techa River cohort. Health Phys 91:393–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bagnara GP, Bonsi L, Strippoli P et al (2000) Hemopoiesis in healthy old people and centenarians: well-maintained responsiveness of CD34 + cells to hemopoietic growth factors and remodeling of cytokine network. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 55:61–70Google Scholar
  6. Baraboĭ VA, Oleĭnik SA (1999) Stress in the etiology of radiation injury. Role of regulatory mechanisms. Radiats Biol Radioecol 39:438–443 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  7. Bond VP, Fliedner TM, Archambeau JO (1965) Mammalian radiation lethality: a disturbance in cellular kinetics. Academic Press, New York, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng T (2004) Cell cycle inhibitors in normal and tumor stem cells. Oncogene 23:7256–7266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cox DR, Hinkley DV (1974) Theoretical statistics. Chapman and Hall, LondonMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Dainiak N, Waselenko JK, Armitage JO et al. (2003) The hematologist and radiation casualties. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 473–496Google Scholar
  11. Degteva MO, Vorobiova MI, Tolstykh EI (2006) Development of an improved dose reconstruction system for the Techa River population affected by the operation of the Mayak Production Association. Radiat Res 166:255–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Degteva MO, Shagina NB, Tolstykh EI et al (2007) An approach to reduction of uncertainties in internal doses reconstructed for the Techa River population. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 127:480–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fliedner TM, Graessle DH (2008) Hematopoietic cell renewal systems: mechanisms of coping and failing after chronic exposure to ionizing radiation. Radiat Environ Biophys 47:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fliedner TM, Feinendegen LE, Hopewell JW (2002) Chronic irradiation: tolerance and failure in complex biological systems. Br J Radiol Suppl 26, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Fliedner TM, Graessly D, Paulsen C, Reiners K (2002b) Structure and function of bone marrow hemopoiesis: mechanisms of response to ionizing radiation exposure. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 17:405–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gruzdev GP, Yevseyenko NK, Rozhdestvensky LM et al (1963) Failure of cell regeneration of red bone marrow in rats exposed to ionizing radiation. Med Radiol 8:35–42 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  17. Grygoryev YuG, Popov VI, Shifirkin AV, Antipenko DB (1986) Somatic effects of chronic exposure by gamma irradiation. Energoatomizdat, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  18. Guskova AK, Baysogolov GD (1971) Radiation sickness of human. Meditsina, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  19. Hosmer D, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression. John Wiley, New YorkMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Human Mortality Database (HMD) (2009) University of California at Berkeley, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. http://www.mortality.org. Access Jan 2009
  21. ICRP (1984) International Commission on Radiological Protection, Publication 41: nonstochastic effects of ionizing radiation. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. ICRP (1991) International Commission on Radiological Protection, Publication 60. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Kossenko MM, Thomas TL, Akleyev AV et al (2005) The Techa River Cohort: study design and follow-up methods. Radiat Res 164:591–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marley SB, Lewis JL, Davidson RJ et al (1999) Evidence for a continuous decline in haemopoietic cell function from birth: application to evaluating bone marrow failure in children. Br J Haematol 106:162–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall, LondonMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Muksinova KN, Mushkacheva GS (1990) Cell and molecular basis of hemopoiesis rearrangement during protracted radiation exposure. Energoatomizdat, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  27. Napier BA, Shagina NB, Degteva MO, Tolstykh EI, Vorobiova MI, Anspaugh LR (2001) Preliminary uncertainty analysis for the doses estimated using the Techa River dosimetry system–2000. Health Phys 81:395–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Novoselova EG, Safonova MV (1994) Functional activity of spleen T- and B-lymphocytes of rats exposed to chronic low-dose gamma radiation. Radiats Biol Radioecol 34:407–413 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  29. Okladnikova ND (2001) In: Ilyin LA (ed) Radiation medicine. Izdat, Moscow, pp 253–274 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  30. Paranich AV, Tyslenko KV, Frolova NA et al (2001) Structural and functional changes in various cells following radiation exposure. Biofizika 46:1103–1107 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  31. Plappert UG, Stocker B, Fender H, Fliedner TM (1997) Changes in the repair capacity of blood cells as a biomarker for chronic low-dose exposure to ionizing radiation. Environ Mol Mutagen 30:153–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Safwat A (2000) The immunobiology of low-dose total-body irradiation: more questions than answers. Radiat Res 153:599–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. SAS (2004) SAS 9.1. Help and documentation. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  34. Seed TM (1996) Hematopoietic tissue repair under chronic low daily dose irradiation. Adv Space Res 18:65–70CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  35. Seed TM, Meyers SM (1993) Chronic radiation-induced alteration in hematopoietic repair during preclinical phases of aplastic anemia and myeloproliferative disease: assessing unscheduled DNA synthesis responses. Cancer Res 53:4518–4527Google Scholar
  36. Seed TM, Tolle DV, Fritz TE (2002) Haematological response to chronic irradiation: the past Argonne experience and future AFRRI initiatives. BJR Suppl 26: 94–103Google Scholar
  37. Seed TM, Fritz TE, Tolle DV, Jackson WE (2002b) Hematopoietic responses under protracted exposures to low daily dose gamma irradiation. Adv Space Res 30:945–955CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  38. Shvedov VL, Akleyev AV (2001) Radiobiology of strontium-90. Megas, Chelyabinsk (in Russian)Google Scholar
  39. Sokolov VV, Gribova IA (1972) Hematological parameters of healthy man. Meditsina, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  40. Sokolov VV, Gribova IA, Vyalova NA, Suvorova LA (1985) Blood and bone marrow investigation. In: Ilyin LA (ed) Organization of medical follow-up of exposed population. Energoatomizdat, Moscow, pp 19–41 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  41. Tuschl H, Steger F, Kovac R (1995) Occupational exposure and its effect on some immune parameters. Health Phys 68:59–66Google Scholar
  42. Valerie K, Yacoub A, Hagan MP et al (2007) Radiation-induced cell signaling: inside-out and outside-in. Mol Cancer Ther 6:789–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Woodruff JJ, Clarke LM, Chin YH (1987) Specific cell-adhesion mechanisms determining migration pathways of recirculating lymphocytes. Annu Rev Immunol 5:201–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yagunov AS, Tokalov SV, Chukhlovin AB, Afanassiev BV (1998) Animal studies of residual hematopoietic and immune system injury from low dose/low dose rate radiation and heavy metals. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute, BethesdaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander V. Akleyev
    • 1
  • Igor V. Akushevich
    • 2
  • Georgy P. Dimov
    • 1
  • Galina A. Veremeyeva
    • 1
  • Tatyana A. Varfolomeyeva
    • 1
  • Svetlana V. Ukraintseva
    • 2
  • Anatoly I. Yashin
    • 2
  1. 1.Clinical DepartmentUrals Research Center for Radiation MedicineChelyabinskRussia
  2. 2.Center for Population Health and AgingDuke UniversityDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations