Advertisement

Risks from Ionising Radiation

  • Kenneth H. Chadwick
  • Hendrik P. Leenhouts
Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)

Abstract

The outline of a quantitative model is presented which can be used to derive the pathway from radiation-induced molecular damage, the DNA double strand break, to cellular effects such as cell killing, chromosomal aberrations and mutations and on to radiation-induced cancer. Evidence is provided to support the links in the chain which relate the different cellular end-points to each other and to cancer. The influence of differing dose rates and types of radiation on dose effect relationships are discussed. The extension to radiation induced cancer is made using a two mutation multi-step model for carcinogenesis and evidence is provided to support the assumption that radiation induced cancer arises from a somatic mutation. The dose response for radiation induced cancer is presented and various implications for radiation risks are outlined. The model is also extended to a consideration of deterministic effects by assuming that these effects arise as a result of multi-cell killing at high acute doses. The implications of the model for medical diagnostic radiology are discussed.

Keywords

Double Strand Break Single Strand Break Radiation Risk Intermediate Cell Deterministic Effect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Académie des Sciences (1997) Problems associated with the effects of low doses of ionising radiations. Académie des Sciences, Rapport N° 38 (Technique and Documentation, Paris)Google Scholar
  2. Albertini RJ, Clark LS, Nicklas JA et al (1997) Radiation quality affects the efficiency of induction and the molecular spectrum of HPRT mutations in human T cells. Radiat Res 148(Suppl):S76–S86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barendsen GW (1964) Impairment of the proliferative capacity of human cells in culture by α-particles with different linear energy transfer. Int J Radiat Biol 8:453–466Google Scholar
  4. Beachy PA, Karhadkar SS, Berman DM (2004) Tissue repair and stem cell renewal in carcinogenesis. Nature 432:324–331PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker K (1997) Threshold or no threshold, that is the question. Radiat Prot Dosim 71:3–5Google Scholar
  6. Benbow RM, Gaudette MF, Hines PJ et al (1985) Initiation of DNA replication in eukaryotes. In: Boynton AL, Leffert HL (eds) Control of Animal Cell Proliferation Vol 1. Academic Press, New York, pp 449–483Google Scholar
  7. Bhambhani R, Kuspira J, Giblak RE (1973) A comparison of cell survival and chromosomal damage using CHO cells synchronised with and without colcemid. Can J Genet Cytol 15:605–618PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bithell JF, Stiller CA (1988) A new calculation of the carcinogenic risk of obstetric X-raying. Stat Med 7:857–864PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bond VP, Wielopolski L, Shani G (1996) Current misinterpretations of the linear no-threshold hypothesis. Health Phys 70:877–882PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Brenner DJ, Ward JF (1992) Constraints on energy deposition and target size of multiply damaged sites associated with DNA double-strand breaks. Int J Radiat Biol 61:737–748PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT et al (2003) Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100:13761–13766PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Buls N, de Mey J (2007) Dose reduction in CT fluotoscopy. In: Tack D, Genevois PA (eds) Radiation Dose from Adult and Pediatric Multidetector Computed Tomography. Diagnostic Imaging. Medical Radiology. Springer, Berlin, pp 195–222Google Scholar
  13. Calabrese EJ (2002) Hormesis: changing view of the dose-response, a personal account of the history and current status. Mutat Res 511:181–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M et al (2005) Risk of cancer after low doses of ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study in 15 countries. Br Med J 331:77–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1973) A molecular theory of cell survival. Phys Med Biol 18:78–87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1975) The effect of an asynchronous population of cells on the initial slope of dose–effect curves. In: Alper T (ed) Cell survival after low doses of radiation: Theoretical and clinical implications. The Institute of Physics and John Wiley and Sons, London, pp 57–63Google Scholar
  17. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1978) The rejoining of DNA double-strand breaks and a model for the formation of chromosomal rearrangements. Int J Radiat Biol 33:517–529Google Scholar
  18. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1981) The molecular theory of radiation biology. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1983) A quantitative analysis of UV-induced cell killing. Phys Med Biol 28:1369–1383PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (1994) DNA double strand breaks from two single strand breaks and cell cycle radiation sensitivity. Radiat Prot Dosim 52:363–366Google Scholar
  21. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP (2011) Radiation induced cancer arises from a somatic mutation. J Radiol Prot 31:41–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Chadwick KH, Leenhouts HP, Brugmans MJP (2003) A contribution to the linear no-threshold discussion. J Radiol Prot 23:53–78PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Chapman JD, Gillespie CJ, Reuvers AP et al (1975) The inactivation of Chinese hamster cells by X-rays: the effects of chemical modifiers on single- and double-events. Radiat Res 64:365–375PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Clarke R (1998) Conflicting scientific views on the health risks of low-level ionising radiation. J Radiol Prot 18:159–160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Clarke R (1999) Control of low-level radiation exposure: time for a change? J Radiol Prot 19:107–115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Cornforth MN (1990) Testing the notion of the one-hit exchange. Radiat Res 121:21–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Darroudi F, Natarajan AT, Savage JRK et al (2001) Induction of chromosomal aberrations by low and high LET radiations: mechanisms and spectra. In: Proceedings European Radiation Research, Dresden 2001 (ISBN 3-00-007790-1)Google Scholar
  28. Dewey WC, Furman SC, Miller HH (1970) Comparison of lethality and chromosomal damage induced by X-rays in synchronised Chinese hamster cell in vitro. Radiat Res 43:561–581PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Dewey WC, Stone LE, Miller HH et al (1971a) Radiosensitization with 5-bromodeoxyuridine of Chinese hamster cells irradiated during different phases of the cell cycle. Radiat Res 47:672–688PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Dewey WC, Miller HH, Leeper DB (1971b) Chromosomal aberrations and mortality of X-irradiated mammalian cells: emphasis on repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 68:667–671PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Dewey WC, Saparetto SA, Betten DA (1978) Hyperthermic radiosensitization of synchronised Chinese hamster cells: relationship between lethality and chromosomal aberrations. Radiat Res 76:48–59PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Doll R, Darby S (1991) Leukaemia: some unsolved problems. Brit Inst Radiol Rep 22:1–6Google Scholar
  33. Edwards R (1997) Radiation roulette. New Sci. (11 October), pp 36–40Google Scholar
  34. Essers J, Hendriks RW, Swagemakers SMA et al (1997) Disruption of mouse RAD54 reduces ionizing radiation resistance and homologous recombination. Cell 89:195–204PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Franken NA P, Ruurs P, Ludwikow G et al (1999) Correlation between cell reproductive death and chromosome aberrations assessed by FISH for low and high doses of radiation and sensitization by iodo-deoxyuridine in human SW-1573 cells. Int J Radiat Biol 75:293–299PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Frankenberg D, Kelnhofer K, Bar K et al (2002) Enhanced neoplastic transformation by mammography X-rays relative to 200 kVp X-rays: indication for a strong dependence on photon energy of the RBEM for various end points. Radiat Res 157:99–105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Friedland W, Jacob P, Paretzke HG et al (1998) Monte Carlo simulation of the production of short DNA fragments by low-linear energy transfer radiation using high-order DNA models. Radiat Res 150:170–182PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Friedland W, Jacob P, Paretzke HG et al (1999) Simulation of DNA-fragment distribution after irradiation with photons. Radiat Environ Biophys 38:39–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Gaudette MF, Benbow RM (1986) Replication forks are under-represented in chromosomal DNA of Xenopus laevis embryos. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83:5953–5957PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Gillespie CJ, Chapman JD, Reuvers AP et al (1975a) The inactivation of Chinese hamster cells by X-rays: synchronized and exponential cell populations. Radiat Res 64:353–364PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Gillespie CJ, Chapman JD, Reuvers AP et al (1975b) Survival of X-irradiated hamster cells: analysis in terms of the Chadwick–Leenhouts model. In: Alper T (ed) Cell survival after low doses of radiation: Theoretical and clinical implications. The Institute of Physics and John Wiley and Sons, London, pp 25–31Google Scholar
  42. Gofman JW, Tamplin AR (1971) The question of safe radiation thresholds for alpha-emitting bone seekers in man. Health Phys 21:47–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Goodhead DT, Thacker J, Cox R (1979) Effectiveness of 0.3 keV carbon ultrasoft X-rays for the inactivation and mutation of cultured mammalian cells. Int J Radiat Biol 36:101–114Google Scholar
  44. Goodhead DT, Virsik RP, Harder D et al (1980) Ultrasoft X-rays as a tool to investigate radiation-induced dicentric chromosome aberrations. In: Booz J, Ebert HG, Hartfield HD (eds) Proceedings of the seventh symposium on microdosimetry EUR 7147. Harewood Academic Press, London, pp 1275–1285 Google Scholar
  45. Griffin CS, Stevens DL, Savage JRK (1996) Ultrasoft 1.5 keV aluminium X-rays are efficient producers of complex chromosome exchange aberrations revealed by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Radiat Res 146:144–150PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Griffin CS, Hill MA, Papworth DG et al (1998) Effectiveness of 0.28 keV carbon K ultrasoft X-rays at producing simple and complex chromosome exchanges in human fibroblasts in vitro detected using FISH. Int J Radiat Biol 73:591–598PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Hammond EC (1966) Smoking in relation to the death rates of one million men and women. In: Epidemiological study of cancer and other chronic diseases. National Cancer Institute Monograph 19, pp 127—204Google Scholar
  48. Heidenreich WF, Paretzke HG, Jacob P (1997a) No evidence for increased tumor rates below 200 mSv in the atomic bomb survivors data. Radiat Environ Biophys 36:205–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Heidenreich WF, Paretzke HG, Jacob P (1997b) Reply to the ‘Commentary’ by D. A. Pierce and D. L. Preston. Radiat Environ Biophys 36:211–212Google Scholar
  50. Heyes GJ, Mill AJ (2004) The neoplastic transformation potential of mammography X-rays and atomic bomb radiation. Radiat Res 162:120–127PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Heyes GJ, Mill AJ, Charles MW (2006) Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme. Brit J Radiol 79:195–200PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Heyes GJ, Mill AJ, Charles MW (2009) Mammography—oncogenicity at low doses. J Radiol Prot 29:A123–A132PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. ICRP 1991 (1990) Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Annals of the ICRP 21:1–3Google Scholar
  54. ICRP (2003) The evolution of the current system of radiological protection: the justification for new ICRP recommendations (a memorandum from the International Commission on Radiological Protection). J Radiol Prot 23:129–142Google Scholar
  55. Iliakis G (1984) The influence of conditions affecting repair and fixation of potentially lethal damage on the induction of 6-thioguanine resistance after exposure of mammalian cells to X-rays. Mutat Res 126:215–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Kellerer AM (2000) Risk estimates for radiation-induced cancer—the epidemiological evidence. Radiat Environ Biophys 39:17–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Kellerer AM, Nekolla EA (2000) The LNT-controversy and the concept of “Controllable Dose”. Health Phys 74:412–418Google Scholar
  58. Kesavan PC, Sugahara T (1992) Perspectives in mechanistic considerations of biological effects of low dose radiations. In: Sugahara T, Sagan L, Aoyama T (eds) Low dose irradiation and biological defence mechanisms. Excerpta Medica International Congress Series 1013. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 439–443Google Scholar
  59. Knudson AG (1971) Mutation and cancer: statistical study of retinoblastoma gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 68:620–623Google Scholar
  60. Knudson AG (1985) Hereditary cancer, oncogenes and antioncogenes. Cancer Res 45:1437–1443PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Knudson AG (1991) Overview: genes that predispose to cancer. Mutat Res 247:185–190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Lea DE (1946) Actions of radiations on living cells. University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  63. Lea DE, Catcheside DG (1942) The mechanism of induction by radiation of chromosome aberrations in Tradescantia. J Genet 44:216–245Google Scholar
  64. Leenhouts HP (1999) Radon-induced lung cancer in smokers and non-smokers: risk implications using a two mutation carcinogenesis model. Radiat Environ Biophys 38:57–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Leenhouts HP, Brugmans MJP (2000) An analysis of bone and head sinus cancers in radium dial painters using a two-mutation carcinogenesis model. J Radiol Prot 20:169–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Leenhouts HP, Brugmans MJP (2001) Calculation of the 1995 lung cancer incidence in the Netherlands and Sweden caused by smoking and radon: risk implications for radon. Radiat Environ Biophys 40:11–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1976) Stopping power and the radiobiological effects of electrons, gamma rays and ions. In: Booz J, Ebert HG, Smith BGR (eds) Fifth Symposium on Microdosimetry. Commission of the European Communities EUR 5452, Luxembourg, pp 289–308Google Scholar
  68. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1978) An analysis of synergistic sensitization. Br J Cancer 37:198–201Google Scholar
  69. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1984) A quantitative analysis of the cytotoxic action of chemical mutagens. Mutat Res 129:345–357PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1989) The molecular basis of stochastic and nonstochastic effects. Health Phys 57(Suppl. 1):343–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1990) The influence of dose rate on the dose–effect relationship. J Radiat Prot 10:95–102Google Scholar
  72. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1994a) A two-mutation model of radiation carcinogenesis: applications to lung tumours in rodents and implications for risk evaluations. J Radiol Prot 14:115–130Google Scholar
  73. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (1994b) Analysis of radiation induced carcinogenesis using a two stage carcinogenesis model: Implications for dose-effect relationships. Radiat Protect Dosim 52:465–469Google Scholar
  74. Leenhouts HP, Chadwick KH (2011) Dose-effect relationships, epidemiological analysis and the derivation of low dose risk. J Radiol Prot 31:95–105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Leenhouts HP, Brugmans MJP, Chadwick KH (2000) Analysis of thyroid cancer data from the Ukraine after ‘Chernobyl’ using a two-mutation carcinogenesis model. Radiat Environ Biophys 39:89–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Ljungman M (1991) The influence of chromatin structure on the frequency of radiation-induced DNA breaks: a study using nuclear and nucleoid monolayers. Radiat Res 126:58–64PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Ljungman M, Nyberg S, Nygren J et al (1991) DNA-bound proteins contribute much more than soluble intracellular compounds to the intrinsic protection against radiation-induced DNA strand breaks in human cells. Radiat Res 127:171–176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Lloyd DC, Purrott RJ, Dolphin GW et al (1976) Chromosome aberrations induced in human lymphocytes by neutron irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol 29:169–182Google Scholar
  79. Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Prosser JS et al (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 23:179–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Leonard A et al (1988) Frequencies of chromosomal aberrations induced in human blood lymphocytes by low doses of X-rays. Int J Radiat Biol 53:49–55Google Scholar
  81. Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Leonard A et al (1992) Chromosomal aberrations in human lymphocytes induced in vitro by very low doses of X-rays. Int J Radiat Biol 61:335–343PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Luckey TD (1997) Low-dose irradiation reduces cancer deaths. Radiat Prot Manag 14 (6): pp 58–64Google Scholar
  83. Ludwików G, Xiao Y, Hoebe RA et al (2002) Induction of chromosome aberrations in unirradiated chromatin after partial irradiation of a cell nucleus. Int J Radiat Biol 78:239–247PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Metting NF, Braby LA, Roesch WC et al (1985) Dose-rate evidence for two kinds of radiation damage in stationary-phase mammalian cells. Radiat Res 103:204–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Mill AJ, Frankenberg D, Bettega D et al (1998) Transformation of C3H 10T1/2 cells by low doses of ionising radiation: a collaborative study by six European laboratories strongly supporting a linear dose -response relationship. J Radiol Prot 18:79–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Milligan JR, Ng JY-Y, Wu CCL et al (1995) DNA repair by thiols in air shows two radicals make a double-strand break. Radiat Res 143:273–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Milligan JR, Aguilera JA, Nguyen T-TD et al (2000) DNA strand-break yields after post-irradiation incubation with base excision repair endonucleases implicate hydroxyl radical pairs in double-strand break formation. Int J Radiat Biol 76:1475–1483PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Moolgavkar SH, Knudson AG (1981) Mutation and cancer: a model for human carcinogenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 68:1037–1052Google Scholar
  89. Moolgavkar SH, Venzon D (1979) Two-event models for carcinogenesis. Incidence curves for childhood and adult tumors. Math Biosci 47:55–77Google Scholar
  90. Muirhead CR, Goodill AA, Haylock RGE et al (1999) Occupational radiation exposure and mortality: second analysis of the National Registry for Radiation Workers. J Radiol Prot 19:3–26PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Murray D, Prager A, Milas L (1989) Radioprotection of cultured mammalian cells by amniothiols WR-1065 and WR-255591: correlation between protection against DNA double-strand breaks and cell killing after γ-radiation. Radiat Res 120:154–163PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Murray D, Prager A, Vanankeren SC (1990) Comparative effect of the thiols dithiothreitol, cysteamine and WR-151326 on survival and on the induction of DNA damage in cultured Chinese hamster ovary cells exposed to γ-radiation. Int J Radiat Biol 58:71–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. NCRP (2001) Evaluation of the linear-nonthreshold dose-response model for ionizing radiation. NCRP Report No. 136. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  94. Nikjoo H, O’Neill P, Terrisol M et al (1994) Modelling of radiation-induced DNA damage: the early physical and chemical events. Int J Radiat Biol 66:453–457PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Nikjoo H, O’Neill P, Terrissol M et al (1999) Quantitative modelling of DNA damage using Monte Carlo track structure method. Radiat Environ Biophys 37:1–8Google Scholar
  96. Nygren J, Ljungman L, Ahnstrom G (1995) Chromatin structure and radiation-induced DNA strand breaks in human cells: soluble scavengers and DNA-bound proteins offer a better protection against single- than double-strand breaks. Int J Radiat Biol 68:11–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Pierce DA, Preston DL (1997) On 'No evidence for increased tumor rates below 200 mSv in the atomic bomb survivors data'. Radiat Environ Biophys 36:209–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Pierce DA, Shimuzu Y, Preston DL et al (1996) Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950–1990. Radiat Res 146:1–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Pohl-Ruhling J, Fischer P, Haas O et al (1983) Effects of low-dose acute X-irradiation on the frequencies of chromosomal aberrations in human peripheral lymphocytes in vitro. Mutat Res 110:71–82Google Scholar
  100. Pohl-Ruling J, Fischer P, Lloyd DC et al (1986) Chromosomal damage induced in human lymphocytes by low doses of D-T neutrons. Mutat Res 173:267–272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Prise KM, Davies S, Michael BD (1987) The relationship between radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks and cell kill in hamster V79 fibroblasts irradiated with 250-kVp X-rays, 2.3 MeV neutrons or 238Pu α-particles. Int J Radiat Biol 52:893–902Google Scholar
  102. Prise KM, Davies S, Michael BD (1993) Evidence for induction of DNA double-strand breaks at paired radical sites. Radiat Res 134:102–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Prise KM, Gillies NE, Michael BD (1999) Further evidence for double-strand breaks originating from a paired radical precursor from studies of oxygen fixation processes. Radiat Res 151:635–641PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Radford IR (1985) The level of induced DNA double-strand breakage correlates with cell killing after X-irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol 48:45–54Google Scholar
  105. Radford IR (1986) Evidence for a general relationship between the induced level of DNA double-strand breakage and cell killing after X-irradiation of mammalian cells. Int J Radiat Biol 49:611–620Google Scholar
  106. Rao BS, Hopwood LE (1982) Modification of mutation frequency in plateau Chinese hamster ovary cells exposed to gamma radiation during recovery from potentially lethal damage. Int J Radiat Biol 42:501–508Google Scholar
  107. Resnick MA (1976) The repair of double-strand breaks in DNA: a model involving recombination. J Theor Biol 59:97–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. Revell SH (1963) Chromatid aberrations—the general theory. In: Wolff S (ed) Radiation induced chromosome aberrations. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 41–72Google Scholar
  109. Revell SH (1974) The breakage-and-reunion theory and the exchange theory for chromosomal aberrations induced by ionizing radiation: a short history. Adv Radiat Biol 4:367–416Google Scholar
  110. Richold M, Holt PD (1974) The effect of differing neutron energies on mutagenesis in cultured Chinese hamster cells. In: Biological Effects of Neutron Irradiation (IAEA, Vienna) pp 237–244Google Scholar
  111. Rowland RE (1994) Radium in humans: a review of US studies. US Department of Commerce. Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  112. Sagan L (1992) It’s time to re-think the radiation paradigm. In: Sugahara T, Sagan L, Aoyama T (eds) Low dose irradiation and biological defence mechanisms. Excerpta Medica International Congress Series 1013. Elsevier, Amsterdam pp 3–12Google Scholar
  113. Sax K (1940) X-ray-induced chromosomal aberrations in Tradescantia. Genetics 25:41–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA et al (2003) Data from computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK—2003 Review. NRPB—67, National Radiological Protection Board, ChiltonGoogle Scholar
  115. Simpson P, Savage JRK (1996) Dose-response curves for simple and complex chromosome aberrations induced by X-rays and detected using fluorescence in situ hybridization. Int J Radiat Biol 69:429–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. Sinclair WK (1966) The shape of radiation survival curves of mammalian cells cultured in vitro. In: Biophysical aspects of radiation quality, Techn Rep Ser 58. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, pp 21–43Google Scholar
  117. Skarsgard LD, Wilson DJ, Durrand RE (1993) Survival at low dose in asynchronous and partially synchronized Chinese hamster V79–171 cells. Radiat Res 133:102–107PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Smith-Bindman R (2010) Is computed tomography safe? New eng. J Med 363:1–4Google Scholar
  119. Stewart AM, Kneale GW (1990) A-bomb radiation and evidence of late effects other than cancer. Health Phys 58:729–735PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. Stewart AM, Webb J, Giles D et al (1956) Malignant disease in childhood and diagnostic radiation in utero. Lancet 2:p 447Google Scholar
  121. Stewart AM, Webb J, Hewitt D (1958) A survey of childhood malignancies. Br Med J 1:1495–1508PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. Thacker J, Cox R (1975) Mutation induction and inactivation in mammalian cells exposed to ionizing radiation. Nature 258:429–431PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. Thacker J, Stretch A, Stephens MA (1977) The induction of thioguanine-resistant mutants of Chinese hamster cells by γ-rays. Mutat Res 42:313–326PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. Thacker J, Wilkinson RE, Goodhead DT (1986) The induction of chromosome exchange aberrations by carbon ultrasoft X-rays in V79 hamster cells. Int J Radiat Biol 49:645–656Google Scholar
  125. Todd P (1967) Heavy-ion irradiation of cultured human cells. Radiat Res Suppl 7:196–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. Traynor JE, Still ET (1968) Dose rate effect on LD50/30 in mice exposed to cobalt-60 gamma irradiation. Brooks Air Force Base, TX:USAF School of Aerospace Medicine; Rep. SAM-TR-68-97Google Scholar
  127. Tubiana M (1998) The report of the French Academy of Science: problems associated with the effects of low doses of ionising radiations. J Radiat Prot 18:243–248Google Scholar
  128. Tubiana M (2000) Radiation risks in perspective: radiation-induced cancer among cancer risks. Radiat Environ Biophys 39:3–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. Underbrink AG, Sparrow AH, Sautkulis D, Mills RE (1975) Oxygen enhancement ratios (OERs) for somatic mutations in Tradescantia stamen hairs. Radiat Bot 15:161–168Google Scholar
  130. UNSCEAR (2000) Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Report to the General Assembly, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  131. Upton AC, Jenkins VK, Conklin JW (1964) Myeloid leukemia in the mouse. Ann N Y Acad Sci 114:189–202PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. Virsik RP, Schafer CH, Harder D et al (1980) Chromosome aberrations induced in human lymphocytes by ultrasoft Al-K and Cu X-rays. Int J Radiat Biol 38:545–557Google Scholar
  133. Vivek Kumar PR, Mohankumar MN, Zareena Hamza V et al (2006) Dose-rate effect on the induction of HPRT mutants in Human G0 lymphocytes exposed in vitro to gamma radiation. Radiat Res 165:43–50Google Scholar
  134. Wakeford R (2005) Cancer risk among nuclear workers. J Radiat Prot 25:225–228Google Scholar
  135. Wakeford R, Doll R, Bithell JF (1997) Childhood cancer and intrauterine irradiation, In: Health effects of low dose radiation: challenges of the 21st century. British Nuclear Energy Society, London, pp 114–119Google Scholar
  136. Wells RL, Bedford JS (1983) Dose-rate effects in mammalian cells IV: repairable and non-repairable damage in non-cycling C3H 10T1/2 cells. Radiat Res 94:105–134PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CumbriaUK
  2. 2.BennekomThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations