Introduction to “Molecular Dosimetry”

  • L. Ehrenberg
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSA, volume 250)


The main message of this introduction concerns the necessity of keeping the quantitative aspects in mind in applications and development of methods for molecular dosimetry and related biochemical methods.


Risk Estimation Radiological Protection Adduct Level Background Incidence ICRP Publication 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barr, J.T., 1985, The calculation and use of carcinogenic potency: A review, Regulat Toxicol. Pharmacol. 5:432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ehrenberg, L., 1978, Dose-response relationships for biological effects of ionizing radiation; application in risk estimation, Report to the Swedish Energy Commission, Swedish Govt., Ds I, 24:1 (in Swedish with English summary and table texts).Google Scholar
  3. Ehrenberg, L., 1979, Risk assessment of ethylene oxide and other compounds, in: “Assessing Chemical Mutagens: The Risk to Humans,” V.K. McElheny, and S. Abrahamson, eds, Ehrenberg, L. 1,Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Ehrenberg, L., Ekman, G., and Svensson, Â., 1990, Epidemiological studies of geographic variations of cancer incidence in Sweden, Acta Oncol. 29:961.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ehrenberg, L., Moustacchi, E., Osterman-Golkar, S., and Ekman, G., 1983, Dosimetry of genotoxic agents and dose-response relationships of their effects, Mutai. Res. 123:121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ehrenberg, L., and Scalia-Tomba, G.P, 1991, Mathematical models for the initiating and promotive action of carcinogens, in: “Statistical Methods in Toxicology, Lecture Notes in Medical Informatics,” L. Hothorn, ed., Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  7. Ehrenberg, L., Törnqvist, M., and Vaca, C, 1992, Cancer risks from low doses of ionizing radiation and electrophilic chemicals: similarities and differences. Ms.Google Scholar
  8. Granath, F., 1991, Statistical problems in estimating a threshold in a dose-response model., in: “Statistical Methods in Toxicology,” L. Hothorn, ed., Lecture Notes in Medical Informatics, Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  9. Granath, F., Ehrenberg, L., and Törnqvist, M., 1993, Degree of alkylation of macromolecules in vivo from variable exposure. Mutat. Res.(in press).Google Scholar
  10. Herrlich, P., 1992, Induction of gene expression by radiation, in: “Radiation Research: Vol. 2: Proceedings,” W.C. Dewey et al., eds. (in press).Google Scholar
  11. Higginson, J., and Muir, C.S., 1979, Environmental carcinogenesis: misconceptions and limitations to cancer control, J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 63:1291.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. ICRP, 1977, “ICRP Publication No. 26, Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection,” Pergamon, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. ICRP, 1991, “ICRP Publication No. 60, 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection,” Pergamon, Oxford.Google Scholar
  14. International Chernobyl Project, 1991, “Assessment of Radiological Consequences and Evaluation of Protective Measures. Report by an International Advisory Committee, a: An Overview; b: Technical Report,” IAEA, Vienna.Google Scholar
  15. Lewtas, J., 1992, Carcinogenic risks of polycyclic organic matter (POM): Development of a comparative potency method, Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg. (in press).Google Scholar
  16. NRC, National Research Council, 1990, Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations. “Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. BEIR V Report,” National Academy Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  17. O’Riordan, T., 1979, Environmental impact analysis and risk assessment in a management perspective, in: “Energy Risk Management,” G.T. Goodman and W.D. Rowe, eds., Academic Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
  18. Osterman-Golkar, S., Ehrenberg, L., and Wachtmeister, CA, 1970, Reaction kinetics and biological action in barley of mono-functional methanesulfonic esters, Radiat. Bot. 10:303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Smith, K.C., 1992, Spontaneous mutagenesis: experimental, genetic and other factors, Mutat. Res. 277:139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Storer, J.B., Mitchell, T.J., and Fry, R.J.M., 1988, Extrapolation of the relative risk of radiogenic neoplasms across mouse strains and to man, Radiat. Res. 114:331.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Thilly, W., 1991, Mutational spectrometry: opportunity and limitations in human risk assessment, in: “Human Carcinogen Exposure: Biomonitoring and Risk Assessment,” R.C. Garner, P.B. Farmer, G.T. Steel and A.S. Wright, eds., Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Törnqvist, M., and Ehrenberg, L., 1992, On the cancer risk of urban air pollution, Environ. Health Perspect (submitted).Google Scholar
  23. Törnqvist, M., and Kautiainen, A., 1992, Adducted proteins for identification of endogenous electrophiles, Environ. Health Perspect. (in press).Google Scholar
  24. Törnqvist, M., Mowrer, J., Jensen, S., and Ehrenberg, L., 1986, Monitoring of environmental cancer initiators through hemoglobin adducts by a modified Edman degradation method, Anal. Biochem. 154:255.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Turtóczky, I., and Ehrenberg, L., 1969, Reaction rates and biological action of alkylating agents; preliminary report on bactericidal and mutagenic action in E. coli, Mutat. Res. 8:229.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. UNSCEAR, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, 1988, “Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation,” Report to the General Assembly, United Nations, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Ehrenberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiobiologyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations