The United States radiation medical countermeasures (MCM) programme for radiological and nuclear incidents has been focusing on developing mitigators for the acute radiation syndrome (ARS) and delayed effects of acute radiation exposure (DEARE), and biodosimetry technologies to provide radiation dose assessments for guiding treatment. Because a nuclear accident or terrorist incident could potentially expose a large number of people to low to moderate doses of ionising radiation, and thus increase their excess lifetime cancer risk, there is an interest in developing mitigators for this purpose. This article discusses the current status, issues, and challenges regarding development of mitigators against radiation-induced cancers. The challenges of developing mitigators for ARS include: the long latency between exposure and cancer manifestation, limitations of animal models, potential side effects of the mitigator itself, potential need for long-term use, the complexity of human trials to demonstrate effectiveness, and statistical power constraints for measuring health risks (and reduction of health risks after mitigation) following relatively low radiation doses (<0.75 Gy). Nevertheless, progress in the understanding of the molecular mechanisms resulting in radiation injury, along with parallel progress in dose assessment technologies, make this an opportune, if not critical, time to invest in research strategies that result in the development of agents to lower the risk of radiation-induced cancers for populations that survive a significant radiation exposure incident.

/pdf/mitigating-the-risk-of-radiation-induced-cancers-limitations-vnl2kt81lm.pdf

Mitigating the risk of radiation-induced cancers: limitations and paradigms in drug development

Recent epidemiology studies highlighted the detrimental health effects of exposure to low dose and low dose rate ionizing radiation (IR): nuclear industry workers studies have shown increased leukaemia and solid tumour risks following cumulative doses of <100mSv and dose rates of <10mGy per year; paediatric patients studies have reported increased leukaemia and brain tumours risks after doses of 30-60mGy from computed tomography scans. Questions arise, however, about the impact of even lower doses and dose rates where classical epidemiological studies have limited power but where subsets within the large cohorts are expected to have an increased risk. Further progress requires integration of biomarkers or bioassays of individual exposure, effects and susceptibility to IR. The European DoReMi (Low Dose Research towards Multidisciplinary Integration) consortium previously reviewed biomarkers for potential use in IR epidemiological studies. Given the increased mechanistic understanding of responses to low dose radiation the current review provides an update covering technical advances and recent studies. A key issue identified is deciding which biomarkers to progress. A roadmap is provided for biomarker development from discovery to implementation and used to summarise the current status of proposed biomarkers for epidemiological studies. Most potential biomarkers remain at the discovery stage and for some there is sufficient evidence that further development is not warranted. One biomarker identified in the final stages of development and as a priority for further research is radiation specific mRNA transcript profiles.

/pdf/ionizing-radiation-biomarkers-in-epidemiological-studies-an-4okj109zkp.pdf

Ionizing radiation biomarkers in epidemiological studies – An update

The effects of dose-rate and its implications on radiation biodosimetry methods are not well studied in the context of large-scale radiological scenarios. There are significant health risks to individuals exposed to an acute dose, but a realistic scenario would include exposure to both high and low dose-rates, from both external and internal radioactivity. It is important therefore, to understand the biological response to prolonged exposure; and further, discover biomarkers that can be used to estimate damage from low-dose rate exposures and propose appropriate clinical treatment. We irradiated human whole blood ex vivo to three doses, 0.56 Gy, 2.23 Gy and 4.45 Gy, using two dose rates: acute, 1.03 Gy/min and a low dose-rate, 3.1 mGy/min. After 24 h, we isolated RNA from blood cells and these were hybridized to Agilent Whole Human genome microarrays. We validated the microarray results using qRT-PCR. Microarray results showed that there were 454 significantly differentially expressed genes after prolonged exposure to all doses. After acute exposure, 598 genes were differentially expressed in response to all doses. Gene ontology terms enriched in both sets of genes were related to immune processes and B-cell mediated immunity. Genes responding to acute exposure were also enriched in functions related to natural killer cell activation and cell-to-cell signaling. As expected, the p53 pathway was found to be significantly enriched at all doses and by both dose-rates of radiation. A support vectors machine classifier was able to distinguish between dose-rates with 100 % accuracy using leave-one-out cross-validation. In this study we found that low dose-rate exposure can result in distinctive gene expression patterns compared with acute exposures. We were able to successfully distinguish low dose-rate exposed samples from acute dose exposed samples at 24 h, using a gene expression-based classifier. These genes are candidates for further testing as markers to classify exposure based on dose-rate.

/pdf/radiation-dose-rate-effects-on-gene-expression-for-human-1607u9q0h3.pdf

Radiation dose-rate effects on gene expression for human biodosimetry

Previous investigations in gene expression changes in blood after radiation exposure have highlighted its potential to provide biomarkers of exposure. Here, FDXR transcriptional changes in blood were investigated in humans undergoing a range of external radiation exposure procedures covering several orders of magnitude (cardiac fluoroscopy, diagnostic computed tomography (CT)) and treatments (total body and local radiotherapy). Moreover, a method was developed to assess the dose to the blood using physical exposure parameters. FDXR expression was significantly up-regulated 24 hr after radiotherapy in most patients and continuously during the fractionated treatment. Significance was reached even after diagnostic CT 2 hours post-exposure. We further showed that no significant differences in expression were found between ex vivo and in vivo samples from the same patients. Moreover, potential confounding factors such as gender, infection status and anti-oxidants only affect moderately FDXR transcription. Finally, we provided a first in vivo dose-response showing dose-dependency even for very low doses or partial body exposure showing good correlation between physically and biologically assessed doses. In conclusion, we report the remarkable responsiveness of FDXR to ionising radiation at the transcriptional level which, when measured in the right time window, provides accurate in vivo dose estimates.

/pdf/fdxr-is-a-biomarker-of-radiation-exposure-in-vivo-3ac4sqrnol.pdf

FDXR is a biomarker of radiation exposure in vivo

The risk of a large-scale event leading to acute radiation exposure necessitates the development of high-throughput methods for providing rapid individual dose estimates. Our work addresses three goals, which align with the directive of the European Union's Realizing the European Network of Biodosimetry project (EU-RENB): 1. To examine the suitability of different gene expression platforms for biodosimetry purposes; 2. To perform this examination using blood samples collected from prostate cancer patients (in vivo) and from healthy donors (in vitro); and 3. To compare radiation-induced gene expression changes of the in vivo with in vitro blood samples. For the in vitro part of this study, EDTA-treated whole blood was irradiated immediately after venipuncture using single X-ray doses (1 Gy/min(-1) dose rate, 100 keV). Blood samples used to generate calibration curves as well as 10 coded (blinded) samples (0-4 Gy dose range) were incubated for 24 h in vitro, lysed and shipped on wet ice. For the in vivo part of the study PAXgene tubes were used and peripheral blood (2.5 ml) was collected from prostate cancer patients before and 24 h after the first fractionated 2 Gy dose of localized radiotherapy to the pelvis [linear accelerator (LINAC), 580 MU/min, exposure 1-1.5 min]. Assays were run in each laboratory according to locally established protocols using either microarray platforms (2 laboratories) or qRT-PCR (2 laboratories). Report times on dose estimates were documented. The mean absolute difference of estimated doses relative to the true doses (Gy) were calculated. Doses were also merged into binary categories reflecting aspects of clinical/diagnostic relevance. For the in vitro part of the study, the earliest report time on dose estimates was 7 h for qRT-PCR and 35 h for microarrays. Methodological variance of gene expression measurements (CV ≤10% for technical replicates) and interindividual variance (≤twofold for all genes) were low. Dose estimates based on one gene, ferredoxin reductase (FDXR), using qRT-PCR were as precise as dose estimates based on multiple genes using microarrays, but the precision decreased at doses ≥2 Gy. Binary dose categories comprising, for example, unexposed compared with exposed samples, could be completely discriminated with most of our methods. Exposed prostate cancer blood samples (n = 4) could be completely discriminated from unexposed blood samples (n = 4, P < 0.03, two-sided Fisher's exact test) without individual controls. This could be performed by introducing an in vitro-to-in vivo correction factor of FDXR, which varied among the laboratories. After that the in vitro-constructed calibration curves could be used for dose estimation of the in vivo exposed prostate cancer blood samples within an accuracy window of ±0.5 Gy in both contributing qRT-PCR laboratories. In conclusion, early and precise dose estimates can be performed, in particular at doses ≤2 Gy in vitro. Blood samples of prostate cancer patients exposed to 0.09-0.017 Gy could be completely discriminated from pre-exposure blood samples with the doses successfully estimated using adjusted in vitro-constructed calibration curves.

https://bioone.org/journals/radiation-research/volume-185/issue-2/RR14221.1/Examining-Radiation-Induced-In-Vivo-and-In-Vitro-Gene-Expression/10.1667/RR14221.1.pdf

Examining Radiation-Induced In Vivo and In Vitro Gene Expression Changes of the Peripheral Blood in Different Laboratories for Biodosimetry Purposes: First RENEB Gene Expression Study

Rapid biodosimetry tools are required to assist with triage in the case of a large-scale radiation incident. Here, we aimed to determine the dose-assessment accuracy of the well-established dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) and cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN) in comparison to the emerging γ-H2AX foci and gene expression assays for triage mode biodosimetry and radiation injury assessment. Coded blood samples exposed to 10 X-ray doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) of up to 6.4 Gy were sent to participants for dose estimation. Report times were documented for each laboratory and assay. The mean absolute difference (MAD) of estimated doses relative to the true doses was calculated. We also merged doses into binary dose categories of clinical relevance and examined accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the assays. Dose estimates were reported by the first laboratories within 0.3–0.4 days of receipt of samples for the γ-H2AX and gene expression assays compared to 2.4 and 4 days for the DCA and CBMN assays, ...

/pdf/comparison-of-established-and-emerging-biodosimetry-assays-1hog1stgfr.pdf

Comparison of Established and Emerging Biodosimetry Assays

The study design and obtained results represent an intercomparison of various laboratories performing dose assessment using the dicentric chromosome analysis (DCA) as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25–5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1–6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. DCA was performed according to established protocols. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 2.4 days after sample arrival. DCA dose estimates were reported with high and comparable accuracy, with MAD values ranging between 0.16–0.5 Gy f...

Laboratory intercomparison of the dicentric chromosome analysis assay.

The focus of the study is an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25–5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1–6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. The CBMN assay was performed according to protocols individually established and varying among participating laboratories. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 4 days after sample arrival. The CBMN dose estimates were reported with high accuracy (MAD val...

/pdf/laboratory-intercomparison-of-the-cytokinesis-block-35meab9jl1.pdf

H. Boulay-Greene

Papers

Comparison of Established and Emerging Biodosimetry Assays

Laboratory intercomparison of the dicentric chromosome analysis assay.

Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay.