Introduction to Radiation Biology

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Introduction to Radiation Biology Outline Introduction to • Terminology Radiation Biology • Development of radiobiological damage • Cell cycle • Cell survival curves Survey of Clinical Radiation Oncology • Radiobiological damage: oxygenation, fractionation, and 4 R’s of radiobiology Lecture 2 • Cell and tissue radiosensitivity Radiation biology Types of ionizing radiations • Radiation biology is the study of the action of • Electromagnetic radiations ionizing radiation on living organisms – X-rays and Gamma-rays • The action is very complex, involving physics, chemistry, and biology • Particulate radiations – Different types of ionizing radiation – Electrons, protons, a-particles, heavy charged – Energy absorption at the atomic and molecular level particles leads to biological damage – Neutrons – Repair of damage in living organisms • All charged particles: directly ionizing radiation • Basic principles are used in radiation therapy with the objective to treat cancer with minimal damage • X and g-rays, as well as neutrons – indirectly to the normal tissues ionizing radiation Types of ionizing radiations Linear Energy Transfer • If radiation is absorbed in biologic material, ionizations and excitations occur in a pattern that depends on the • Linear energy transfer (LET) is the energy type of radiation involved transferred per unit length of the track • Depending on how far the primary ionization events • The special unit usually used for this quantity is are separated in space, radiation is characterized as sparsely ionizing (x-rays) or densely ionizing (a- keV/mm of unit density material particles) • It is an average quantity, typically track averaged • Heavier particles with larger charge produce higher ionization density • For a given particle type, the density of ionization LET dE/ dl decreases as the energy (and velocity) goes up 1 Linear Energy Transfer Relative Biological Effectiveness • Equal doses of different types of radiation do not produce equal biologic effects – 1 Gy of neutrons produces a greater biologic effect than 1 Gy of x-rays due to the difference in the pattern of energy deposition at the microscopic level • The relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) of some test radiation (r) compared with 250 kV x-rays is defined D RBE 250kV • The method of averaging makes little difference for x- Dr rays or for mono-energetic charged particles, but the track • D250kV and Dr are the doses of x-rays and the test average and energy average are different for neutrons radiation required for equal biological effect Relative Biological Effectiveness Development of radiobiological damage • Because the x-ray and neutron survival curves have different shapes the resultant RBE depends on the level of biologic damage chosen • The RBE for a fractionated regimen with neutrons is greater than for a single exposure (because the RBE is larger for smaller doses) Development of radiobiological Characteristic time scales damage • The physical event of absorption occurs over Incident radiation about 10-15 seconds • The biologic lifetime of the free radical is on Radiation absorption the order of 10-10 - 10-9 seconds (10-5 seconds in the presence of air) Excitation and ionization • The expression of cell death may take up to Free radical formation days to months • The expression of carcinogenesis may take Brakeage of chemical bonds years or generations Biological effects 2 Absorption of radiation Biological effect • Biological systems are very sensitive to radiation • The biological effect is expressed in cell • Absorption of 4 Gy in water produces the rise in killing, or cell transformation (carcinogenesis temperature ~10-3 oC (~67 cal in 70-kg person) and mutations) • Whole body dose of 4 Gy given to human is • The primary target of radiation is DNA lethal in 50% of cases (LD50) molecule, suffering breaks in chemical bonds • The potency of radiation is in its concentration • Depending on the extent of the damage, it can be repaired through several repair mechanisms and the damage done to the genetic material of in place in a living organism each cell The structure of DNA DNA as a target • DNA molecule has many deoxyribo-nucleotides (bases) • Single-strand breaks are of little linked in a chain-like arrangement biologic consequence because they • Bases are held by hydrogen bonds are repaired readily using the and are paired complimentary opposite strand as a template (adenine with thymine; cytosine • Double-strand breaks are believed with guanine) to be the most important lesions • Each half is a template for produced in chromosomes by reconstruction of the other half radiation; the interaction of two • During cell division each strand is self-replicated double-strand breaks may result in resulting in identical molecules cell killing, carcinogenesis, or mutation Direct and indirect actions • In direct action, a secondary Free radicals electron resulting from absorption • A free radical is an atom or molecule carrying an unpaired of an x-ray photon interacts with orbital electron in the outer shell. This state is associated the DNA to produce an effect with a high degree of chemical reactivity • In indirect action, the secondary • Since 80% of a cell is composed of water, as a result of the electron interacts with, for interaction with a photon or a charged particle, the water example, a water molecule to molecule may become ionized: produce a hydroxyl radical (OH-), which in turn produces the H2O H2O e damage to the DNA + -10 • H2O is an ion radical with a lifetime of ~10 s; it decays • The DNA helix has a diameter of to form highly reactive hydroxyl free radical OH ~ 2 nm; free radicals produced in H O H O H O OH a cylinder with a diameter ~ 4 nm 2 2 3 can affect the DNA • About 2/3 of the x-ray damage to DNA in mammalian -3 • Indirect action is dominant for cells is caused by the hydroxyl radical (lifetime of ~10 s) sparsely ionizing radiation (x-rays) 3 Chromosomes Chromosome aberrations • DNA molecules carry the • Damage to DNA may result in lethal damage genetic information or repair efforts modulated by specific • Chromosome is an enzymes may result in mutations which can be organized structure of DNA perpetuated in subsequent cellular divisions and DNA-bound proteins (serve to package the DNA • Mutations are mostly characterized by and control its functions) deletions (where part of the genetic message is lost) or translocations where a segment of a • Chromosomes are located chromosome is lost from its proper location mostly in cell nucleus (some and recombines with another chromosome amount is in mitochondria) Radiation-induced aberrations Radiation-induced aberrations A: Symmetric translocation: radiation produces breaks in two different pre-replication chromosomes. The broken pieces are exchanged between the two chromosomes, and the “sticky” ends rejoin. B: Deletion: radiation produces two breaks in the same arm of the same chromosome Lethal aberrations include dicentrics (A), rings (B), and Symmetric translocations and small anaphase bridges (C) deletions are nonlethal The cell cycle Mutations • M - mitosis, identifiable by • If occur in the germ cells (sperm and ova) they light microscopy and the can be passed on as genetic abnormalities in most constant time (~ 1 hr) offspring • S - DNA synthesis phase • If they occur in the somatic cells (the cells that • G1 - the first gap in activity, make up an organism) they can lead to the between mitosis and the S development of diseases including cancer - this is phase (most variable length) called carcinogenesis • G2 - the second gap in • There are genes called oncogenes that affect activity, between S phase cancer incidence and the next mitosis • If an inhibitory oncogene is lost due to a deletion • If the cells stop progressing the patient is at higher risk for cancer formation through the cycle (if they are arrested) they are in G0 4 Variation of radiosensitivity Molecular checkpoint genes with cell age in the mitotic cycle • Cell-cycle progression is • Cells are most sensitive at or close to M (mitosis) controlled by a family of molecular checkpoint genes • G2 phase is usually as sensitive as M phase • Their function is to ensure the • Resistance is usually greatest in the latter part correct order of cell-cycle events of S phase due to repairs that are more likely to • The genes involved in radiation occur after the DNA has replicated effects halt cells in G2, so that an inventory of chromosome • If G1 phase has an appreciable length, a resistant damage can be taken, and repair period is evident early in G1, followed by a initiated and completed, before the mitosis is attempted sensitive period toward the end of G1 • Cells that lack checkpoint genes are sensitive to radiation-induced cell killing, and carcinogenesis Mechanisms of cell death after Cell survival curves irradiation • The main target of radiation is cell’s DNA: single breaks are often reparable, double breaks lethal • Mitotic death – cells die attempting to divide, primarily due to asymmetric chromosome aberrations; most common mechanism • Apoptosis – programmed cell death; characterized by a predefined sequence of events resulting in cell separation in apoptotic bodies • A cell survival curve describes the relationship between the • Bystander effect – cells directly affected by radiation dose and the proportion of cells that survive radiation release cytotoxic molecules inducing • Usually presented in the form with dose plotted on a linear scale death in neighboring cells and surviving fraction on a log scale Cell survival curve
Recommended publications
  • The Radiation Challenge Module 2: Radiation Damage in Living Organisms Educator Guide
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Space Faring The Radiation Challenge An Interdisciplinary Guide on Radiation and Human Space Flight Module 2: Radiation Damage in Living Organisms Educational Product Educators Grades and Students 9 – 12 EP-2007-08-117-MSFC Radiation Educator Guide Module 2: Radiation Damage in Living Organisms Prepared by: Jon Rask, M.S., ARC Education Specialist Wenonah Vercoutere, Ph.D., NASA ARC Subject Matter Expert Al Krause, MSFC Education Specialist BJ Navarro, NASA ARC Project Manager Space Faring: The Radiation Challenge i Table of Contents Module 2: Module 2: Radiation Damage in Living Organisms .............................................................................1 Why is NASA Studying the Biological Effects of Radiation? .........................................................1 How Do Scientists Study Biological Change During Spaceflight? .................................................1 Using Non-Human Organisms to Understand Radiation Damage ................................................2 What are the Risks and Symptoms of Radiation Exposure for Humans? .......................................3 What is DNA? ..............................................................................................................................3 What is the Structure of DNA? .....................................................................................................3 What is DNA’s Role in Protein Production? ..................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Time, Dose and Fractionation in Radiotherapy
    2/25/2013 The introduction of Fractionation 2-13/13 Radiobiology lecture Time, Dose and Fractionation in Radiotherapy The Four Rs of Radiobiology Repair of Sublethal Damage • Cells exposed to sparse radiation experience • Efficacy of fractionation based on the 4 Rs: sublethal injury that can be repaired – Repair of sublethal damage • Cell killing requires a greater total dose when given –Repopulation in several fractions – Reassortment of cells within the cell cycle • Most tissue repair occurs in about 3 hours and up –Reoxygenation to 24 hours post radiation • Allows for repair of injured normal tissue and gives a potential therapeutic advantage over tumor cells Reoxygenation Redistribution • Oxygen stabilizes free radicals • Position in cell cycle at time of radiation • Hypoxic cells require more radiation to kill determines sensitivity •Hypoxic tumors • S phase is radioresistant – Temporary vessel constriction •G2 phase delay results in increased radiation – Outgrowth of blood supply and capillary collapse resistance • Tumor shrinkage reduces hypoxic areas • Fractionated RT redistributes cells • Reinforces fractionated dosing • Rapidly cycling cells like mucosa, skin are more sensitive • Slower cyclers like connective tissue, brain are spared 1 2/25/2013 Repopulation • Increased regeneration of surviving fraction Basics of Fractionation • Rapidly proliferating tumors regenerate faster • Determines the length and timing of therapy course • Dividing a dose into several fractions spares normal tissues • Accelerated Repopulation – Repair
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Energy in Everyday Life Nuclear Energy in Everyday Life
    Nuclear Energy in Everyday Life Nuclear Energy in Everyday Life Understanding Radioactivity and Radiation in our Everyday Lives Radioactivity is part of our earth – it has existed all along. Naturally occurring radio- active materials are present in the earth’s crust, the floors and walls of our homes, schools, and offices and in the food we eat and drink. Our own bodies- muscles, bones and tissues, contain naturally occurring radioactive elements. Man has always been exposed to natural radiation arising from earth as well as from outside. Most people, upon hearing the word radioactivity, think only about some- thing harmful or even deadly; especially events such as the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, or the Chernobyl Disaster of 1986. However, upon understanding radiation, people will learn to appreciate that radia- tion has peaceful and beneficial applications to our everyday lives. What are atoms? Knowledge of atoms is essential to understanding the origins of radiation, and the impact it could have on the human body and the environment around us. All materi- als in the universe are composed of combination of basic substances called chemical elements. There are 92 different chemical elements in nature. The smallest particles, into which an element can be divided without losing its properties, are called atoms, which are unique to a particular element. An atom consists of two main parts namely a nu- cleus with a circling electron cloud. The nucleus consists of subatomic particles called protons and neutrons. Atoms vary in size from the simple hydro- gen atom, which has one proton and one electron, to large atoms such as uranium, which has 92 pro- tons, 92 electrons.
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Radiation Damage on Xenon Diffusion in Silicon Carbide
    Influence of radiation damage on xenon diffusion in silicon carbide E. Friedland*a, K. Gärtnerb, T.T. Hlatshwayoa, N.G. van der Berga, T.T. Thabethea a Physics Department, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa b Institut für Festkörperphysik, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena, Germany Keywords silicon carbide, diffusion, radiation damage *Corresponding author. E mail: [email protected], Phone: +27-12-4202453, Fax: +27-12-3625288 Diffusion of xenon in poly and single crystalline silicon carbide and the possible influence of radiation damage on it are investigated. For this purpose 360 keV xenon ions were implanted in commercial 6H-SiC and CVD-SiC wafers at room temperature, 350 °C and 600 °C. Width broadening of the implantation pro- files and xenon retention during isochronal and isothermal annealing up to temperatures of 1500 °C was de- termined by RBS-analysis, whilst in the case of 6H-SiC damage profiles were simultaneously obtained by a- particle channelling. No diffusion or xenon loss was detected in the initially amorphized and eventually re- crystallized surface layer of cold implanted 6H-SiC during annealing up to 1200 °C. Above that temperature serious erosion of the implanted surface occurred, which made any analysis impossible. No diffusion or xen- on loss is detected in the hot implanted 6H-SiC samples during annealing up to 1400 °C. Radiation damage dependent grain boundary diffusion is observed at 1300 °C in CVD-SiC. 1 Introduction Modern high-temperature nuclear reactors (HTR’s) commonly use fuel elements containing triple isotropic cladded (TRISO) fuel particles. These are fuel kernels surrounded by four successive lay- ers of low-density pyrolitic carbon, high-density pyrolitic carbon, silicon carbide and high-density pyrolitic carbon, with silicon carbide being the main barrier to prevent the release of fission prod- ucts.
    [Show full text]
  • High Altitude Nuclear Detonations (HAND) Against Low Earth Orbit Satellites ("HALEOS")
    High Altitude Nuclear Detonations (HAND) Against Low Earth Orbit Satellites ("HALEOS") DTRA Advanced Systems and Concepts Office April 2001 1 3/23/01 SPONSOR: Defense Threat Reduction Agency - Dr. Jay Davis, Director Advanced Systems and Concepts Office - Dr. Randall S. Murch, Director BACKGROUND: The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) was founded in 1998 to integrate and focus the capabilities of the Department of Defense (DoD) that address the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat. To assist the Agency in its primary mission, the Advanced Systems and Concepts Office (ASCO) develops and maintains and evolving analytical vision of necessary and sufficient capabilities to protect United States and Allied forces and citizens from WMD attack. ASCO is also charged by DoD and by the U.S. Government generally to identify gaps in these capabilities and initiate programs to fill them. It also provides support to the Threat Reduction Advisory Committee (TRAC), and its Panels, with timely, high quality research. SUPERVISING PROJECT OFFICER: Dr. John Parmentola, Chief, Advanced Operations and Systems Division, ASCO, DTRA, (703)-767-5705. The publication of this document does not indicate endorsement by the Department of Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the official position of the sponsoring agency. 1 Study Participants • DTRA/AS • RAND – John Parmentola – Peter Wilson – Thomas Killion – Roger Molander – William Durch – David Mussington – Terry Heuring – Richard Mesic – James Bonomo • DTRA/TD – Lewis Cohn • Logicon RDA – Les Palkuti – Glenn Kweder – Thomas Kennedy – Rob Mahoney – Kenneth Schwartz – Al Costantine – Balram Prasad • Mission Research Corp. – William White 2 3/23/01 2 Focus of This Briefing • Vulnerability of commercial and government-owned, unclassified satellite constellations in low earth orbit (LEO) to the effects of a high-altitude nuclear explosion.
    [Show full text]
  • Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation
    SOURCES, EFFECTS AND RISKS OF IONIZING RADIATION United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2016 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes UNITED NATIONS New York, 2017 NOTE The report of the Committee without its annexes appears as Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 46 and corrigendum (A/71/46 and Corr.1). The report reproduced here includes the corrections of the corrigendum. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The country names used in this document are, in most cases, those that were in use at the time the data were collected or the text prepared. In other cases, however, the names have been updated, where this was possible and appropriate, to reflect political changes. UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.17.IX.1 ISBN: 978-92-1-142316-7 eISBN: 978-92-1-060002-6 © United Nations, January 2017. All rights reserved, worldwide. This publication has not been formally edited. Information on uniform resource locators and links to Internet sites contained in the present publication are provided for the convenience of the reader and are correct at the time of issue. The United Nations takes no responsibility for the continued accuracy of that information or for the content of any external website.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives SP001-1
    Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives SP001-1 Published by Health Physics Society 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd. Suite 402 McLean, VA 22101 Disclaimer Statements and opinions expressed in publications of the Health Physics Society or in presentations given during its regular meetings are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Health Physics Society, the editors, or the organizations with which the authors are affiliated. The editor(s), publisher, and Society disclaim any responsibility or liability for such material and do not guarantee, warrant, or endorse any product or service mentioned. Official positions of the Society are established only by its Board of Directors. Copyright © 2017 by the Health Physics Society All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America SP001-1, revised 2017 Radiation and Risk: Expert Perspectives Table of Contents Foreword……………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 2 A Primer on Ionizing Radiation……………………………………………………………………………... 6 Growing Importance of Nuclear Technology in Medicine……………………………………….. 16 Distinguishing Risk: Use and Overuse of Radiation in Medicine………………………………. 22 Nuclear Energy: The Environmental Context…………………………………………………………. 27 Nuclear Power in the United States: Safety, Emergency Response Planning, and Continuous Learning…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 33 Radiation Risk: Used Nuclear Fuel and Radioactive Waste Disposal………………………... 42 Radiation Risk: Communicating to the Public………………………………………………………… 45 After Fukushima: Implications for Public Policy and Communications……………………. 51 Appendix 1: Radiation Units and Measurements……………………………………………………. 57 Appendix 2: Half-Life of Some Radionuclides…………………………………………………………. 58 Bernard L.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiobiology Is a Young Science and Is Solely Concerned with the Study Of
    The Rockefeller Foundation and its support of Radiobiology up to the 1970s By Sinclair Wynchank Senior Lecturer University of Cape Town Rondebosch, South Africa [email protected] © 2011 by Sinclair Wynchank Radiation biology, or radiobiology, is a very young science, solely concerned with the study of the interactions between ionizing radiation and living matter. This science slowly became a recognized field of study after the discovery of ionizing radiation (i.e., X rays) in 1895. A broadly varied and evolving terminology has been applied to aspects of radiobiology and therefore, archival searches concerning it are complex. This report is a work in progress, which mainly recounts support given by the Rockefeller Foundation (RF) to radiobiology. The RF was a most important player in the early history of radiobiology and a crucial influence in ensuring that the science steadily matured during its first six decades. Time constraints prevented all relevant items from being accessed, but a clear idea of the RF‟s strong influence on radiobiology‟s early history has resulted. Examples of RF activities to verify this assertion are given below, in by and large chronological order. After a brief analysis of RF aid, there is a short account of why its support so strongly benefitted the young science. To my knowledge there is very little written about the history of radiobiology and nothing about the role that the RF or other philanthropic bodies played in this history. Inevitably, for an extensive time, individual radiobiologists first studied other fields of science before radiobiology. Even in 2011 there are only five universities in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Status on Radiation Damage in Nuclear Materials and Recommendations for Iaea Activities
    XA0202570 IC/IR/2002/4 INTERNAL REPORT (Limited Distribution) United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization and International Atomic Energy Agency THE ABDUS SALAM INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS RESEARCH STATUS ON RADIATION DAMAGE IN NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IAEA ACTIVITIES TECHNICAL REPORT Alfredo Caro and Magdalena Caro Centro Atomico Bariloche, 8400 Bariloche, Argentina and The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. MIRAMARE - TRIESTE March 2002 3 3/ IC/2002/19 United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization and International Atomic Energy Agency THE ABDUS SALAM INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS RESEARCH STATUS ON RADIATION DAMAGE IN NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IAEA ACTIVITIES TECHNICAL REPORT Alfredo Caro and Magdalena Caro Centro Atomico Bariloche, 8400 Bariloche, Argentina and The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. MIRAMARE - TRIESTE March 2002 Contents Foreword 3 Introduction 4 State of the art in the area Technological standpoint 4 Scientific perspectives 10 Recommendations for IAEA activities 18 Examples of research areas 20 Deliverables 22 Conclusions 22 References 22 Foreword On the basis of the exchange of ideas that the authors have had since July 2000 with Prof. Yu Lu of the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, and with Drs. W. Burkart and D. Muir of the International Atomic Energy Agency, we present a report on the present status of the technological and scientific aspects of embrittlement of nuclear reactor pressure vessels, together with our advise on what could be the concerted action between the Abdus Salam ICTP and IAEA aiming at the promotion of research activities in the field of materials science, particularly focused in issues relevant to nuclear applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Low Dose and Low Dose-Rate Radiation Effects and Models
    Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting Program Low Dose and Low Dose-Rate Radiation Effects and Models April 14–15, 2008 Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center 5701 Marinelli Road North Bethesda, MD 20852 On the cover: • top: Two nuclei have each been “hit” by three alpha particles from a microbeam and show activated γH2AX foci at the site of the traversal. • center: Chromosome painting technology makes it possible to identify each human chromosome and characterize the number, location and types of aberrations produced by ionizing radiation. • bottom: Measuring the frequency of micronuclei provides a rapid measure of cytogenetic damage, which increases as a function of radiation dose. Introduction Low Dose and Low Dose-Rate Radiation Effects and Models Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) Potential human health effects of low doses of ionizing models of the biological responses and human health radiation such as those experienced in occupational impacts of exposure to low doses of radiation. The and medical exposures are of great contemporary meeting will feature presentations by international interest. Considerable debate exists over the applica- experts on the topics of (1) molecular, cellular, tissue, bility of a linear-nonthreshold model for characterizing and laboratory animal studies on the effects of expo- the biological responses and health effects of expo- sure to low dose and low dose-rate radiation, (2) sure to low radiation doses, and alternative models results of epidemiological studies on human health have been proposed. A related subject of interest and effects of low radiation doses in occupational, medical debate is the effect of the rate of delivery of radiation and other exposure scenarios, (3) potential impacts of doses on the biological and health outcomes of expo- these findings on future regulatory guidance and pub- sure.
    [Show full text]
  • Radioresistance of Brain Tumors
    cancers Review Radioresistance of Brain Tumors Kevin Kelley 1, Jonathan Knisely 1, Marc Symons 2,* and Rosamaria Ruggieri 1,2,* 1 Radiation Medicine Department, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA; [email protected] (K.K.); [email protected] (J.K.) 2 The Feinstein Institute for Molecular Medicine, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] (M.S.); [email protected] (R.R.); Tel.: +1-516-562-1193 (M.S.); +1-516-562-3410 (R.R.) Academic Editor: Zhe-Sheng (Jason) Chen Received: 17 January 2016; Accepted: 24 March 2016; Published: 30 March 2016 Abstract: Radiation therapy (RT) is frequently used as part of the standard of care treatment of the majority of brain tumors. The efficacy of RT is limited by radioresistance and by normal tissue radiation tolerance. This is highlighted in pediatric brain tumors where the use of radiation is limited by the excessive toxicity to the developing brain. For these reasons, radiosensitization of tumor cells would be beneficial. In this review, we focus on radioresistance mechanisms intrinsic to tumor cells. We also evaluate existing approaches to induce radiosensitization and explore future avenues of investigation. Keywords: radiation therapy; radioresistance; brain tumors 1. Introduction 1.1. Radiotherapy and Radioresistance of Brain Tumors Radiation therapy is a mainstay in the treatment of the majority of primary tumors of the central nervous system (CNS). However, the efficacy of this therapeutic approach is significantly limited by resistance to tumor cell killing after exposure to ionizing radiation. This phenomenon, termed radioresistance, can be mediated by factors intrinsic to the cell or by the microenvironment.
    [Show full text]
  • General Guidelines for the Estimation of Committed Effective Dose from Incorporation Monitoring Data
    Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaftt Wissenschaftliche Berichte FZKA 7243 General Guidelines for the Estimation of Committed Effective Dose from Incorporation Monitoring Data (Project IDEAS – EU Contract No. FIKR-CT2001-00160) H. Doerfel, A. Andrasi, M. Bailey, V. Berkovski, E. Blanchardon, C.-M. Castellani, C. Hurtgen, B. LeGuen, I. Malatova, J. Marsh, J. Stather Hauptabteilung Sicherheit August 2006 Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Wissenschaftliche Berichte FZKA 7243 GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR THE ESTIMATION OF COMMITTED EFFECTIVE DOSE FROM INCORPORATION MONITORING DATA (Project IDEAS – EU Contract No. FIKR-CT2001-00160) H. Doerfel, A. Andrasi 1, M. Bailey 2, V. Berkovski 3, E. Blanchardon 6, C.-M. Castellani 4, C. Hurtgen 5, B. LeGuen 7, I. Malatova 8, J. Marsh 2, J. Stather 2 Hauptabteilung Sicherheit 1 KFKI Atomic Energy Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary 2 Health Protection Agency, Radiation Protection Division, (formerly National Radiological Protection Board), Chilton, Didcot, United Kingdom 3 Radiation Protection Institute, Kiev, Ukraine 4 ENEA Institute for Radiation Protection, Bologna, Italy 5 Belgian Nuclear Research Centre, Mol, Belgium 7 Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France 8 Electricité de France (EDF), Saint-Denis, France 9 National Radiation Protection Institute, Praha, Czech Republic Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, Karlsruhe 2006 Für diesen Bericht behalten wir uns alle Rechte vor Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH Postfach 3640, 76021 Karlsruhe Mitglied der Hermann von Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Deutscher Forschungszentren (HGF) ISSN 0947-8620 urn:nbn:de:0005-072434 IDEAS General Guidelines – June 2006 Abstract Doses from intakes of radionuclides cannot be measured but must be assessed from monitoring, such as whole body counting or urinary excretion measurements.
    [Show full text]