DOCSLIB.ORG

Duke University Medical Center

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Duke University Medical Center CURRICULUM VITAE Date Prepared: 12/01/2011 Name (complete with degrees): Mark Oldham, PhD Primary academic appointment: Professor, Radiation Oncology Physics Primary academic department (not DUAP): Radiation Oncology Secondary appointment (if any) –(department): Associate Professor, Biomedical Engineering Present academic rank and title (if any): Professor Date and rank of first Duke Faculty appointment: January, 2004, Associate Professor Specialty certification(s) and dates (Month/Day/Year): American Board of Medical Physics Certification 2001 Radiation Oncology Physics re-cert 2010 American Board of Radiology Certification (equivalency) ` 2005 Radiation Oncology Physics Date of birth: 10/22/1965 Place (include city/state/country): Manchester, United Kingdom Citizen of: USA and UK (Dual) Visa status (if applicable): Education: Institution Date (year) Degree Major Manchester University, UK 1987 BSc, Class 1 Physics University of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK 1991 PhD Physics Scholarly societies (Alpha Omega Alpha, Sigma Xi, Phi Beta Kappa, etc): none Professional training and academic career (chronologically, beginning with first postgraduate position): Institution Position/Title Dates The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) & Postdoctoral Research Fellow 1992-1995 The Royal Marsden NHS Trust, Sutton, UK The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) Lecturer in Medical Physics 1995-1998 & The Royal Marsden NHS Trust, Sutton, UK William Beaumont Hospital, Clinical Staff Physicist 1998-2003 Royal Oak, MI USA Duke University Medical Center Associate Professor, (Primary) 2004 - 2011 Radiation Oncology Physics Associate Professor, Biomedical 2006 -2008 Engineering (Secondary) 2010+ Director of Radiation Therapy Track, 2005-Present Medical Physics Graduate Program Publications: (Do not include submitted papers or papers in preparation: List separately those papers in press.) PLEASE NUMBER ALL ENTRIES SEQUENTIALLY (1# OLDEST) 1. Referred journals: (Referred journals are scientific publications that have active editorial boards and a system of critical review of all submissions for publications.) 1. Oldham M, Edge R, Lowes F, A Decametric Scale Investigation of the Gravitational Constant, Geophysical Journal International, 113(1) p83-94, 1993 2. Oldham M, Webb S. The optimization and inherent limitations of 3D conformal radiotherapy treatment plans of the prostate. Br J Radiol. 1995 Aug;68(812):882-93. 3. Oldham M, Neal AJ, Webb S. The optimisation of wedge filters in radiotherapy of the prostate. Radiother Oncol. 1995 Dec;37(3):209-20. 4. Oldham M, Neal A, Webb S. A comparison of conventional 'forward planning' with inverse planning for 3D conformal radiotherapy of the prostate. Radiother Oncol. 1995 Jun;35(3):248-62. 5. Neal AJ, Oldham M, Dearnaley DP. Comparison of treatment techniques for conformal radiotherapy of the prostate using dose-volume histograms and normal tissue complication probabilities. Radiother Oncol. 1995 Oct;37(1):29-34. 6. Webb S, Oldham M. A method to study the characteristics of 3D dose distributions created by superposition of many intensity-modulated beams delivered via a slit aperture with multiple absorbing vanes. Phys Med Biol. 1996 Oct;41(10):2135-53. 7. Oldham M, Webb S. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy by means of static tomotherapy: a planning and verification study. Med Phys. 1997 Jun;24(6):827-36. 8. Bedford JL, Oldham M, Hoess A, Evans PM, Shentall GS, Webb S. Methods for transferring patient and plan data between radiotherapy treatment planning systems. Br J Radiol. 1997 Jul;70(835):740-9. 9. Rowbottom CG, Webb S, Oldham M. Improvements in prostate radiotherapy from the customization of beam directions. Med Phys. 1998 Jul;25(7 Pt 1):1171-9. 10. Oldham M, McJury M, Baustert IB, Webb S, Leach MO. Improving calibration accuracy in gel dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 1998 Oct;43(10):2709-20. 11. Oldham M, Khoo VS, Rowbottom CG, Bedford JL, Webb S. A case study comparing the relative benefit of optimizing beam weights, wedge angles, beam orientations and tomotherapy in stereotactic radiotherapy of the brain. Phys Med Biol. 1998 Aug;43(8):2123-46. 12. Oldham M, Baustert I, Lord C, Smith TA, McJury M, Warrington AP, Leach MO, Webb S. An investigation into the dosimetry of a nine-field tomotherapy irradiation using BANG-gel dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 1998 May;43(5):1113-32. 13. Guzel Z, Bedford JL, Childs PJ, Nahum AE, Webb S, Oldham M, Tait D. A comparison of conventional and conformal radiotherapy of the oesophagus: work in progress. Br J Radiol. 1998 Oct;71(850):1076-82. 14. Rowbottom CG, Webb S, Oldham M. Is it possible to optimize a radiotherapy treatment plan? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Feb 1;43(3):698-9. 15. Rowbottom CG, Webb S, Oldham M. Beam-orientation customization using an artificial neural network. Phys Med Biol. 1999 Sep;44(9):2251-62. 16. Rowbottom CG, Oldham M, Webb S. Constrained customization of non-coplanar beam orientations in radiotherapy of brain tumours. Phys Med Biol. 1999 Feb;44(2):383-99. 17. Hepworth S, McJury MJ, Oldham M, Morton EJ, Doran SJ Dosae mapping of inhomogeneities positioned in radiosensitive polymer gels. Nucl. Instr. Meth. In Phys. Res. A 422 pp756-760, 1999 18. McJury M, Tapper PD, Cosgrove VP, Murphy PS, Griffin S, Leach MO, Webb S, Oldham M. Experimental 3D dosimetry around a high-dose-rate clinical 192Ir source using a polyacrylamide gel (PAG) dosimeter. Phys Med Biol. 1999 Oct;44(10):2431-44. 19. McJury M, Oldham M, Leach MO, Webb S. Dynamics of polymerization in polyacrylamide gel (PAG) dosimeters: (I) ageing and long-term stability. Phys Med Biol. 1999 Aug;44(8):1863-73. 20. Khoo VS, Oldham M, Adams EJ, Bedford JL, Webb S, Brada M. Comparison of intensity-modulated tomotherapy with stereotactically guided conformal radiotherapy for brain tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Sep 1;45(2):415-25. 21. Bedford JL, Khoo VS, Oldham M, Dearnaley DP, Webb S. A comparison of coplanar four-field techniques for conformal radiotherapy of the prostate. Radiother Oncol. 1999 Jun;51(3):225-35. 22. McJury M, Oldham M, Cosgrove VP, Murphy PS, Doran S, Leach MO, Webb S. Radiation dosimetry using polymer gels: methods and applications. Br J Radiol. 2000 Sep;73(873):919-29. 23. Low DA, Markman J, Dempsey JF, Mutic S, Oldham M, Venkatesan R, Haacke EM, Purdy JA. Noise in polymer gel measurements using MRI. Med Phys. 2000 Aug;27(8):1814-7. 24. Baustert IC, Oldham M, Smith TA, Hayes C, Webb S, Leach MO. Optimized MR imaging for polyacrylamide gel dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 2000 Apr;45(4):847-58. 25. Oldham M, Siewerdsen JH, Shetty A, Jaffray DA. High resolution gel-dosimetry by optical-CT and MR scanning. Med Phys. 2001 Jul;28(7):1436-45. 26. Oldham M, “Radiation physics and applications in therapeutic medicine”, Phys. Ed. 36 p460-467 Nov (2001) 27. Oldham M, Sapareto SA, Li XA, Allen J, Sutlief S, Wong OC, Wong JW. Practical aspects of in situ 16O (gamma,n) 15O activation using a conventional medical accelerator for the purpose of perfusion imaging. Med Phys. 2001 Aug;28(8):1669-78. 28. Oldham M, Siewerdsen JH, Kumar S, Wong J, Jaffray DA. Optical-CT gel-dosimetry I: basic investigations. Med Phys. 2003 Apr;30(4):623-34. 29. Oldham M. Optical-CT scanning of polymer gels. J Phys. 2004;3:122-135. 30. Oldham M, Kim L. Optical-CT gel-dosimetry. II: Optical artifacts and geometrical distortion. Med Phys. 2004 May;31(5):1093-104. 31. Létourneau D, Gulam M, Yan D, Oldham M, Wong JW. Evaluation of a 2D diode array for IMRT quality assurance. Radiother Oncol. 2004 Feb;70(2):199-206. 32. Oldham M, Létourneau D, Watt L, Hugo G, Yan D, Lockman D, Kim LH, Chen PY, Martinez A, Wong JW. Cone-beam-CT guided radiation therapy: A model for on-line application. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Jun;75(3):271.E1-8. 33. Oldham M, Kim L, Hugo G. Optical-CT imaging of complex 3D dose distributions. J Phys. 2005 Apr;5745:138-146. 34. Létourneau D, Wong JW, Oldham M, Gulam M, Watt L, Jaffray DA, Siewerdsen JH, Martinez AA. Cone- beam-CT guided radiation therapy: technical implementation. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Jun;75(3):279-86. 35. Das SK, Baydush AH, Zhou S, Miften M, Yu X, Craciunescu O, Oldham M, Light K, Wong T, Blazing M, Borges-Neto S, Dewhirst MW, Marks LB. Predicting radiotherapy-induced cardiac perfusion defects. Med Phys. 2005 Jan;32(1):19-27. 36. Yin FF, Das S, Kirkpatrick J, Oldham M, Wang Z, Zhou SM. Physics and imaging for targeting of oligometastases. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2006 Apr;16(2):85-101. 37. Oldham M. 3D dosimetry by optical-CT scanning. J Phys. 2006;56:58-71. 38. Oldham M, Sakhalkar H, Oliver T, Wang YM, Kirpatrick J, Cao Y, Badea C, Johnson GA, Dewhirst M. Three-dimensional imaging of xenograft tumors using optical computed and emission tomography. Med Phys. 2006 Sep;33(9):3193-202. 39. Oldham M, Sakhalkar H, Guo P. A dual-purpose CCD based micro-optical-CT scanning system. J Phys. 2006 Dec 1;56(1):199-202. 40. Oldham M, Guo P, Gluckman G, Adamovics J. IMRT verification using a radiochromic/optical-CT dosimetry system. J Phys. 2006;56:221-224. 41. Oldham M, Guo P, Adamovics J, Sakhalkar H, Wang Z, Yin F. Towards four dimensional (4D) dosimetry for radiation-therapy. J Phys. 2006;56:225-227. 42. Guo PY, Adamovics JA, Oldham M. Characterization of a new radiochromic three-dimensional dosimeter. Med Phys. 2006 May;33(5):1338-45. 43. Guo P, Adamovics J, Oldham M. Quality assurance in 3D dosimetry by optical-CT. J Phys. 2006 Dec 1;56(1):191-194. 44. Guo P, Adamovics J, Oldham M. A practical three-dimensional dosimetry system for radiation therapy. Med Phys.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category
    小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category Airborne contamination sensor Title Depth Evaluation of Entrained Products (DEEP) Proposed by Create Technologies Ltd & Costain Group PLC １．DEEP is a sensor analysis software for analysing contamination. DEEP can distinguish between surface contamination and internal / absorbed contamination. The software measures contamination depth by analysing distortions in the gamma spectrum. The method can be applied to data gathered using any spectrometer. Because DEEP provides a means of discriminating surface contamination from other radiation sources, DEEP can be used to provide an estimate of surface contamination without physical sampling. DEEP is a real-time method which enables the user to generate a large number of rapid contamination assessments- this data is complementary to physical samples, providing a sound basis for extrapolation from point samples. It also helps identify anomalies enabling targeted sampling startegies. DEEP is compatible with small airborne spectrometer/ processor combinations, such as that proposed by the ARM-U project – please refer to the ARM-U proposal for more details of the air vehicle. Figure 1: DEEP system core components are small, light, low power and can be integrated via USB, serial or Ethernet interfaces. 小型飛翔体／海外 Figure 2: DEEP prototype software ２．Past experience (plants in Japan, overseas plant, applications in other industries, etc) Create technologies is a specialist R&D firm with a focus on imaging and sensing in the nuclear industry. Createc has developed and delivered several novel nuclear technologies, including the N-Visage gamma camera system. Costainis a leading UK construction and civil engineering firm with almost 150 years of history.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Hazard Location
    Radiation Hazard Location Radiation Detector JS Stanley US Patent 8,399.859 B2 March 19, 2013 Using semi spherical PRESAGE with a lead collimator to detect contaminated Hot Cells Improving the Presage Polymer Radiosensitivity for Hot Cell and Glovebox 3D Characterization Adamovics, John; Farfan, Eduardo B.; Coleman, J. Rusty Health Physics (2013), 104(1), 63-67. RadBall is a novel, passive, radiation detection device that provides 3D mapping of radiation from areas where measurements have not been possible previously due to lack of access or extremely high radiation doses. This kind of technol. is beneficial when decommissioning and decontamination of nuclear facilities occur. The key components of the RadBall technol. include a tungsten outer shell that houses a radiosensitive PRESAGE polymer. The 1.0-cm-thick tungsten shell has a no. of holes that allow photons to reach the polymer, thus generating radiation tracks that are analyzed. Submerged RadBall Deployments in Hanford Site Hot Cells Containing 137CsCl Capsules Farfan, Eduardo B.; Coleman, J. Rusty; Stanley, Steven; Adamovics, John; Oldham, Mark; Thomas, Andrew Health Physics 103:100-106 (2012) The overall objective of this study was to demonstrate that a new technol., known as RadBall, could locate submerged radiol. hazards. RadBall is a novel, passive, radiation detection device that provides a 3-D visualization of radiation from areas where measurements have not been previously possible due to lack of access or extremely high radiation doses. This technol. has been under development during recent years, and all of its previous tests have included dry deployments. This study involved, for the first time, underwater RadBall deployments in hot cells contg.
    [Show full text]
  • PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS R12 64E-5.101 Definitions
    64E-5 Florida Administrative Code Index PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS R12 64E-5.101 Definitions ................................................................................................. I-1 64E-5.102 Exemptions ............................................................................................. I-23 64E-5.103 Records ................................................................................................... I-24 64E-5.104 Tests ... ................................................................................................... I-24 64E-5.105 Prohibited Use ........................................................................................ I-24 64E-5.106 Units of Exposure and Dose ................................................................... I-25 64E-5 Florida Administrative Code Index 64E-5 Florida Administrative Code Index PART II LICENSING OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS R2 64E-5.201 ...... Licensing of Radioactive Material .............................................................. II-1 64E-5.202 ...... Source Material - Exemptions .................................................................... II-2 R12 64E-5.203 ...... Radioactive Material Other than Source Material - Exemptions ................. II-4 SUBPART A LICENSE TYPES AND FEES R12 64E-5.204 ..... Types of Licenses ..................................................................................... II-13 SUBPART B GENERAL LICENSES 64E-5.205 ..... General Licenses - Source Material .........................................................
    [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]
  • Nrc Regulatory Issue Summary 2005-23 Clarification of the Physical Presence Requirement During Gamma Stereotactic Radiosurgery Treatments
    UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 October 7, 2005 NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2005-23 CLARIFICATION OF THE PHYSICAL PRESENCE REQUIREMENT DURING GAMMA STEREOTACTIC RADIOSURGERY TREATMENTS ADDRESSEES All gamma stereotactic radiosurgery (GSR) licensees. INTENT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this regulatory issue summary (RIS) to clarify the definition of the term “physically present,” as used in 10 CFR 35.615(f)(3). No specific action or written response is required. BACKGROUND In March 2005, during a licensing visit to a GSR facility, the NRC staff observed that the authorized medical physicist (AMP) did not remain physically present throughout one of the GSR treatments, as required by 10 CFR 35.615(f)(3). Instead, during the treatment, the AMP walked to the other end of the GSR suite and entered a treatment planning room located more than 30.5 meters (100 feet) away from the GSR treatment console. While discussing this incident with the licensee, the NRC staff recognized that the licensee was misinterpreting the physical presence requirement for GSR treatments. Based on the licensee’s interpretation of the regulations, the licensee considered any location within the GSR suite, including the treatment planning room, to be within hearing distance of normal voice from the GSR treatment console. The licensee believed that, within the contiguous boundary of its GSR suite, the human voice has sufficient volume, without electronic amplification, to alert the AMP of an emergency at essentially any location within its suite and the AMP could respond in a timely manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiosurgery Or Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy Plus Whole-Brain Radioherapy in Brain Oligometastases: a Long-Term Analysis
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH 35: 3055-3060 (2015) Radiosurgery or Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy plus Whole-brain Radioherapy in Brain Oligometastases: A Long-term Analysis MARIO BALDUCCI1, ROSA AUTORINO1, SILVIA CHIESA1, GIANCARLO MATTIUCCI1, ANGELO POMPUCCI2, LUIGI AZARIO3, GIUSEPPE ROBERTO D’AGOSTINO1, MILENA FERRO1, ALBA FIORENTINO1, SERGIO FERSINO1, CIRO MAZZARELLA1, CESARE COLOSIMO4, VINCENZO FRASCINO1, CARMELO ANILE2 and VINCENZO VALENTINI1 Departments of 1Radiation Oncology, 2Neurosurgery, 3Physics and 4Radiology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy Abstract. Aim: To analyze the outcome of patients with number, size, location, the patient’s Karnofsky performance brain oligometastases treated by radiosurgery (SRS) or status (KPS), age, extent of systematic disease and primary fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) after whole- disease status (4, 5). brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Patients and Methods: Overall Patients with one or two brain metastases and with survival (OS) and local control (LC) were evaluated in favorable prognostic features have a relatively favorable patients (patients) with 1-2 brain metastases. Results: Forty- survival; thus, the treatment is frequently more aggressive seven patients were selected. They were submitted to WBRT than for patients with multiple brain metastases (5). (median dose=3,750 cGy) followed by SRS (17 patients; Radiosurgery (SRS) delivered as a single fraction to median dose=1,500 cGy) or FSRT (30 patients; median individual intracranial lesions has been the most common dose=2,000 cGy). Median follow-up was 102 months technique used to dose-escalate on lesions following whole (range=17-151); the median survival was 22 months for the brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and considered as safe SRS group and 16 months for the FSRT group.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Fusion Enhances Cancer Cell Killing Efficacy in a Protontherapy Model
    Nuclear fusion enhances cancer cell killing efficacy in a protontherapy model GAP Cirrone*, L Manti, D Margarone, L Giuffrida, A. Picciotto, G. Cuttone, G. Korn, V. Marchese, G. Milluzzo, G. Petringa, F. Perozziello, F. Romano, V. Scuderi * Corresponding author Abstract Protontherapy is hadrontherapy’s fastest-growing modality and a pillar in the battle against cancer. Hadrontherapy’s superiority lies in its inverted depth-dose profile, hence tumour-confined irradiation. Protons, however, lack distinct radiobiological advantages over photons or electrons. Higher LET (Linear Energy Transfer) 12C-ions can overcome cancer radioresistance: DNA lesion complexity increases with LET, resulting in efficient cell killing, i.e. higher Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE). However, economic and radiobiological issues hamper 12C-ion clinical amenability. Thus, enhancing proton RBE is desirable. To this end, we exploited the p + 11Bà3a reaction to generate high-LET alpha particles with a clinical proton beam. To maximize the reaction rate, we used sodium borocaptate (BSH) with natural boron content. Boron-Neutron Capture Therapy (BNCT) uses 10B-enriched BSH for neutron irradiation-triggered alpha-particles. We recorded significantly increased cellular lethality and chromosome aberration complexity. A strategy combining protontherapy’s ballistic precision with the higher RBE promised by BNCT and 12C-ion therapy is thus demonstrated. 1 The urgent need for radical radiotherapy research to achieve improved tumour control in the context of reducing the risk of normal tissue toxicity and late-occurring sequelae, has driven the fast- growing development of cancer treatment by accelerated beams of charged particles (hadrontherapy) in recent decades (1). This appears to be particularly true for protontherapy, which has emerged as the most-rapidly expanding hadrontherapy approach, totalling over 100,000 patients treated thus far worldwide (2).
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation and Your Patient: a Guide for Medical Practitioners
    RADIATION AND YOUR PATIENT: A GUIDE FOR MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS A web module produced by Committee 3 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) What is the purpose of this document ? In the past 100 years, diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine and radiation therapy have evolved from the original crude practices to advanced techniques that form an essential tool for all branches and specialties of medicine. The inherent properties of ionising radiation provide many benefits but also may cause potential harm. In the practice of medicine, there must be a judgement made concerning the benefit/risk ratio. This requires not only knowledge of medicine but also of the radiation risks. This document is designed to provide basic information on radiation mechanisms, the dose from various medical radiation sources, the magnitude and type of risk, as well as answers to commonly asked questions (e.g radiation and pregnancy). As a matter of ease in reading, the text is in a question and answer format. Interventional cardiologists, radiologists, orthopaedic and vascular surgeons and others, who actually operate medical x-ray equipment or use radiation sources, should possess more information on proper technique and dose management than is contained here. However, this text may provide a useful starting point. The most common ionising radiations used in medicine are X, gamma, beta rays and electrons. Ionising radiation is only one part of the electromagnetic spectrum. There are numerous other radiations (e.g. visible light, infrared waves, high frequency and radiofrequency electromagnetic waves) that do not posses the ability to ionize atoms of the absorbing matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Survey on Decorporation of Radionuclides from the Human Body
    Literature Survey on Decorporation of Radionuclides from the Human Body E.A. Waller, R.Z. Stodilka, K. Leach and L. Prud’homme-Lalonde Defence R&D Canada - Ottawa TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM DRDC Ottawa TM 2002-042 April 2002 Literature Survey on Decorporation of Radionuclides from the Human Body E.A. Waller SAIC Canada, Inc R.Z. Stodilka, K. Leach and L. Prud’homme-Lalonde Space Systems and Technology Defence R&D Canada - Ottawa Technical Memorandum DRDC Ottawa TM 2002-042 April 2002 © Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2002 © Sa majesté la reine, représentée par le ministre de la Défense nationale, 2002 Abstract The broad use of radionuclides by many industries has greatly increased the probability of events that could lead to internalized contamination. Examples include accidents and/or intentional damage to nuclear power plants or radiation therapy units in hospitals, the use of radiological dispersal weapons, and lost or stolen radionuclide sources. Developing effective countermeasures requires knowledge of the physical and chemical composition of the radionuclides, their metabolic activities within the body, and methods to expedite their elimination from the body. This report presents a summary of information pertaining to intake and decorporation of radionuclides from humans. This information would be the first step in establishing a field protocol to guide physicians in military missions. Developing such a guide requires an understanding of the dangers associated with internal radioisotope contamination, decision levels for administering therapy (risk vs. benefit) and protocols for administering therapy. As presented, this study could be used to decide what decorporation pharmaceuticals should be maintained in quantity by the military, and how to best train officers with medical responsibilities.
    [Show full text]
  • A Roadmap for Replacing High-Risk Radioactive Sources and Materials
    1 Permanent Risk Reduction: A Roadmap for Replacing High-Risk Radioactive Sources and Materials Miles A. Pomper James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies The National Academies of Sciences Radioactive Sources: Applications and Alternative Technologies Meeting January 31, 2020 2 Overview • CNS Workshops and Studies • Materials of Security Concern • Uses of Current High-Risk Materials ▫ Medicine ▫ Oil and gas industry • Strategy for Replacing High Activity Sources • Replacement Priority • Encouraging Replacement: Actions • Conclusions 3 CNS Workshops and Studies Since 2008, CNS has led a series of workshops and studies: . Alternatives to High-Risk Radiological Sources: The Case of Cesium Chloride in Blood Irradiation (2014) . Permanent Risk Reduction: A Roadmap for Replacing High-Risk Radioactive Sources and Materials (2015) . Treatment Not Terror: Strategies to Enhance External Beam Cancer Therapy in Developing Countries While Permanently Reducing the Risk of Radiological Terrorism (2016) . Additional material since: for NYC, NTI, and IAEA ICONS, draft language for 2016 NSS 4 Important Current Uses for High-Risk Materials, Existing Alternatives and Challenges, and Suggested Next Steps 5 High-Risk Sources • A task force report by the NRC listed 1. Americium-241 (Am-241) 2. Am-241/Beryllium (Be) 16 radionuclides as those of principal 3. Californium-252 (Cf-252) concern when considering the 4. Cesium-137 (Cs-137) problems they would cause if used in a 5. Cobalt-60 (Co-60) radiological dispersion device (RDD) 6. Curium-244 (Cm-244) • Considered an immediate danger only 7. Gadolinium-153 (Gd-153) when found in large enough amounts 8. Iridium-192 (Ir-192) to threaten life or cause severe 9.
    [Show full text]
  • And Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT)
    Geisinger Health Plan Policies and Procedure Manual Policy: MP084 Section: Medical Benefit Policy Subject: Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy I. Policy: Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) II. Purpose/Objective: To provide a policy of coverage regarding Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) III. Responsibility: A. Medical Directors B. Medical Management IV. Required Definitions 1. Attachment – a supporting document that is developed and maintained by the policy writer or department requiring/authoring the policy. 2. Exhibit – a supporting document developed and maintained in a department other than the department requiring/authoring the policy. 3. Devised – the date the policy was implemented. 4. Revised – the date of every revision to the policy, including typographical and grammatical changes. 5. Reviewed – the date documenting the annual review if the policy has no revisions necessary. V. Additional Definitions Medical Necessity or Medically Necessary means Covered Services rendered by a Health Care Provider that the Plan determines are: a. appropriate for the symptoms and diagnosis or treatment of the Member's condition, illness, disease or injury; b. provided for the diagnosis, and the direct care and treatment of the Member's condition, illness disease or injury; c. in accordance with current standards of good medical treatment practiced by the general medical community. d. not primarily for the convenience of the Member, or the Member's Health Care Provider; and e. the most appropriate source or level of service that can safely be provided to the Member. When applied to hospitalization, this further means that the Member requires acute care as an inpatient due to the nature of the services rendered or the Member's condition, and the Member cannot receive safe or adequate care as an outpatient.
    [Show full text]
  • New Discoveries in Radiation Science
    cancers Editorial New Discoveries in Radiation Science Géza Sáfrány 1,*, Katalin Lumniczky 1 and Lorenzo Manti 2 1 Department Radiobiology and Radiohygiene, National Public Health Center, 1221 Budapest, Hungary; [email protected] 2 Department of Physics, University of Naples Federico II, 80126 Naples, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +36-309199218 This series of 16 articles (8 original articles and 8 reviews) was written by internation- ally recognized scientists attending the 44th Congress of the European Radiation Research Society (Pécs, Hungary). Ionizing radiation is an interesting agent because it is used to cure cancers and can also induce cancer. The effects of ionizing radiation at the organism level depend on the response of the cells. When radiation hits a cell, it might damage any cellular organelles and macromolecules. Unrepairable damage leads to cell death, while misrepaired alterations leave mutations in surviving cells. If the repair is errorless, normal cells will survive. However, in a small percentage of the seemingly healthy cells the number of spontaneous mutations will increase, which is a sign of radiation-induced genomic instability. Radiation-induced cell death is behind the development of acute radiation syndromes and the killing of tumorous and normal cells during radiation therapy. Radiation-induced mutations in surviving cells might lead to the induction of tumors. According to the central paradigm of radiation biology, the genetic material, that is the DNA, is the main cellular target of ionizing radiation. Many different types of damage are induced by radiation in the DNA, but the most deleterious effects arise from double strand breaks (DSBs).
    [Show full text]