Search

In 2015 the United Nations issued 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) addressing a wide range of global social, economic, and environmental challenges. The main goal of this paper is to provide an understanding of how the current System of Radiological Protection relates to these SDGs. In the first part it is proposed that the current System of Radiological Protection is implicitly linked to sustainable development. This is substantiated by analysing the features of the current System as set out by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in its publications. In the second part it is proposed that sustainability should be considered and more explicitly addressed in the next ICRP general recommendations, as part of the currently ongoing review and revision of the current System. A few examples are given of how this could be realised, and it is proposed that this issue should be discussed and developed together with the international community interested in radiological protection., Competing Interests: Declarations. Competing interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The Partner Agencies of the International Space Station (ISS) maintain separate career exposure limits and shared Flight Rules that control the ionising radiation exposures that crewmembers can experience due to ambient environments throughout their space missions. In low Earth orbit as well as further out in space, energetic ions referred to as galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) easily penetrate spacecraft and spacecraft contents and consequently are always present at low dose rates. Protons and electrons that are trapped in the Earth's geomagnetic field are encountered intermittently, and a rare energetic solar particle event (SPE) may expose crew to (mostly) energetic protons. Space radiation protection goals are to optimize radiation exposures to maintain deleterious late effects at known and acceptable levels and to prevent any early effects that might compromise crew health and mission success. The conventional radiation protection metric effective dose provides a basic framework for limiting exposures associated with human spaceflight and can be communicated to all stakeholders. Additional metrics and uncertainty analyses are required to understand more completely and to convey nuanced information about potential impacts to an individual astronaut or to a space mission. Missions to remote destinations well beyond low Earth orbit (BLEO) are upcoming and bestow additional challenges that shape design and radiation protection needs. NASA has recently adopted a more permissive career exposure limit based upon effective dose and new restrictions on mission exposures imposed by nuclear technologies. This manuscript reviews the exposure limits that apply to the ISS crewmembers. This work was performed in collaboration with the advisory and guidance efforts of International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Task Group 115 and will be summarized in an upcoming ICRP Report., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Task Group 115 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection is focusing on mission-related exposures to space radiation and concomitant health risks for space crew members including, among others, risk of cancer development. Uncertainties in cumulative radiation risk estimates come from the stochastic nature of the considered health outcome (i.e., cancer), uncertainties of statistical inference and model parameters, unknown secular trends used for projections of population statistics and unknown variability of survival properties between individuals or population groups. The variability of survival is usually ignored when dealing with large groups, which can be assumed well represented by the statistical data for the contemporary general population, either in a specific country or world averaged. Space crew members differ in many aspects from individuals represented by the general population, including, for example, their lifestyle and health status, nutrition, medical care, training and education. The individuality of response to radiation and lifespan is explored in this modelling study. Task Group 115 is currently evaluating applicability and robustness of various risk metrics for quantification of radiation-attributed risks of cancer for space crew members. This paper demonstrates the impact of interpopulation variability of survival curves on values and uncertainty of the estimates of the time-integrated radiation risk of cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier GmbH.. All rights reserved.)

The International Partner Agencies of the International Space Station (ISS) present a comparison of the ionizing radiation absorbed dose and risk quantities used to characterize example missions in lunar space. This effort builds on previous collaborative work that characterizes radiation environments in space to support radiation protection for human spaceflight on ISS in low-Earth orbit (LEO) and exploration missions beyond (BLEO). A "shielded" ubiquitous galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) environment combined with--and separate from--the transient challenge of a solar particle event (SPE) was modelled for a simulated 30-day mission period. Simple geometries of relatively thin and uniform shields were chosen to represent the space vehicle and other available shielding, and male or female phantoms were used to represent the body's self-shielding. Absorbed dose in organs and tissues and the effective dose were calculated for males and females. Risk parameters for cancer and other outcomes are presented for selected organs. The results of this intracomparison between ISS Partner Agencies itself provide insights to the level of agreement with which space agencies can perform organ dosimetry and calculate effective dose. This work was performed in collaboration with the advisory and guidance efforts of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Task Group 115 and will be presented in an ICRP Report., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier GmbH.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the methodology used to estimate radiation genetic risks and quantify the risk of hereditary effects as outlined in the ICRP Publication 103. It aims to highlight the historical background and development of the doubling dose method for estimating radiation-related genetic risks and its continued use in radiological protection frameworks., Results: This article emphasizes the complexity associated with quantifying the risk of hereditary effects caused by radiation exposure and highlights the need for further clarification and explanation of the calculation method. As scientific knowledge in radiation sciences and human genetics continues to advance in relation to a number of factors including stability of disease frequency, selection pressures, and epigenetic changes, the characterization and quantification of genetic effects still remains a major issue for the radiological protection system of the International Commission on Radiological Protection., Conclusion: Further research and advancements in this field are crucial for enhancing our understanding and addressing the complexities involved in assessing and managing the risks associated with hereditary effects of radiation.

Purpose: Risk analyses, based on relative biological effectiveness (RBE) estimates for neutrons relative to gammas, were performed; and the change in the curvature of the risk to dose response with increasing neutron RBE was analyzed using all solid cancer mortality data from the Radiation Effect Research Foundation (RERF). Results were compared to those based on incidence data., Materials and Methods: This analysis is based on RERF mortality data with separate neutron and gamma doses for colon doses, from which organ averaged doses could be calculated. A model for risk ratio variation with RBE was developed., Results: The best estimate of the neutron RBE considering mortality data was 200 (95% confidence interval (CI): 50-1010) for colon dose using the weighted-dose approach and for organ averaged dose 110 (95% CI: 30-350). The ERR risk ratios for all solid cancers combined, for the best fitting neutron RBE estimate and the neutron RBE of 10 result in a ratio of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.17-0.85) for colon dose and 0.55 (95% CI: 0.18-0.87) for organ averaged dose. The risk to dose response curvature became significantly negative (concave down) with increasing RBE, at a neutron RBE of 170 using colon dose and at an RBE of 90 using organ averaged dose for males when fitting a linear-quadratic dose response. For females, the curvature decreased toward linearity with increasing neutron RBE and remained significantly positive until RBE of 80 and 40 using colon and organ averaged dose, respectively. For higher neutron RBEs, no significant conclusion could be drawn about the shape of the dose-response curve., Conclusions: Application of neutron RBE values higher than 10 results in substantially reduced cancer mortality risk estimates and a significant reduction in curvature of the risk to dose responses for males. Using mortality data, the best fitting neutron RBE is much higher than when incidence data is used. The neutron RBE ranges covered by the overlap in the CIs from both the mortality and incidence analyses are 50-190 using colon dose and in all cases, the best fitting neutron RBE and lower 95% CI are higher than the value of 10 traditionally applied by the RERF. Therefore, it is recommended to consider uncertainties in neutron RBE values when calculating radiation risks and discussing the shape of dose responses using Japanese A-bomb survivors data.

The European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) was founded in 1982. Since then, the group has continuously developed and is currently a network of 80 institutions and more than 600 individual scientists across Europe, including exchange with the scientific community outside of Europe. EURADOS supports research and development of dosimetry and harmonising dosimetric practices. This paper describes the major milestones in the history of the organization. It starts from the very beginning when the idea was born and describes periods during which the role and strategy of the network had to be defined, elaborated and refined. Finally, it ends to date where EURADOS appears as an independent self-sustainable association, which is a reliable partner for various international organisations in radiation research and radiation protection. Major activities of EURADOS are highlighted such as (1) establishment and coordination of Working Groups, (2) regular organization of dosimetric intercomparisons for quality assurance of dosimetry procedures, (3) development and organization of education and training events, and (4) contributions towards the development of strategic and integrated radiation research in Europe., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

In September 2022, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) organised a workshop in Estoril, Portugal, on the 'Review and Revision of the System of Radiological Protection: A Focus on Research Priorities'. The workshop, which was a side event of the European Radiation Protection Week, offered an opportunity to comment on a recent paper published by ICRP on areas of research to support the System of Radiological Protection. Altogether, about 150 individuals participated in the workshop. After the workshop, 16 of the 30 organisations in formal relations with ICRP provided written feedback. All participants and organisations followed ICRP's view that further research in various areas will offer additional support in improving the System in the short, medium, and long term. In general, it was emphasised that any research should be outcome-focused in that it should improve protection of people or the environment. Many research topics mentioned by the participants were in line with those already identified by ICRP in the paper noted above. In addition, further ideas were expressed such as, for example, that lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic with regards to the non-radiological social, economic and environment impacts, should be analysed for their usefulness to enhance radiological protection, and that current protection strategies and application of current radiological protection principles may need to be adapted to military scenarios like those observed recently during the military conflict in the Ukraine or the detonation of a nuclear weapon. On a broader perspective, it was discussed how radiation research and radiological protection can contribute towards the Sustainable Development Goals announced by the United Nations in 2015. This paper summarises the views expressed during the workshop and the major take home messages identified by ICRP., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)

The most recent publicly available data on all solid cancer incidence from the Life Span Study (LSS) of Japanese A-bomb survivors provides colon dose contributions weighted with a relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 10 for neutrons, relative to gammas. However, there is evidence from several investigations that the neutron RBE for A-bomb survivors may be higher than 10. The change in the shape of the corresponding dose-response curves was evaluated by Hafner and co-workers in a previous study by applying sex-specific linear-quadratic dose models to previous LSS data for all solid cancer incidence that include separate neutron and gamma absorbed doses for several organs, in contrast to the most recent data. The resulting curvature change became significantly negative for males at an RBE of 140 for colon, 100 for liver, and 80 for organ averaged dose. For females, the corresponding RBE values were 110, 80, and 60 for colon, liver, and organ averaged doses. The present study compares three different methods to calculate the 95% confidence intervals in an analysis of the curvature with increasing RBE. Further, the impact of a higher neutron RBE on the work of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, and the importance of including uncertainties and performing sensitivity analysis of different parameters in radiation risk assessment are discussed.

Purpose: Development of a model characterizing risk variation with RBE to investigate how the incidence risk for all solid cancers combined varies with higher neutron RBEs and different organ dose types., Material and Methods: The model is based on RERF data with separate neutron and gamma dose information., Results: For both additive and multiplicative linear excess risks per unit organ averaged dose, a reduction of 50% in the risk coefficient per weighted dose arises when a neutron RBE of 110 is used instead of 10. Considering risk per unit liver dose, this reduction occurs for an RBE of 130 and for risks per unit colon dose for an RBE of 190. The change in the shape of the dose response curve when using higher neutron RBEs is evaluated. The curvature changed and became significantly negative for males at an RBE of 140 for colon dose, 100 for liver dose and 80 for organ averaged dose. For females this is the case at an RBE of 110, 80 and 60, respectively., Conclusions: Uncertainties in neutron RBE values should be considered when radiation risks and the shape of dose responses are deduced from cancer risk data from the atomic bomb survivors.

Despite decades of research to understand the biological effects of ionising radiation, there is still much uncertainty over the role of dose rate. Motivated by a virtual workshop on the "Effects of spatial and temporal variation in dose delivery" organised in November 2020 by the Multidisciplinary Low Dose Initiative (MELODI), here, we review studies to date exploring dose rate effects, highlighting significant findings, recent advances and to provide perspective and recommendations for requirements and direction of future work. A comprehensive range of studies is considered, including molecular, cellular, animal, and human studies, with a focus on low linear-energy-transfer radiation exposure. Limits and advantages of each type of study are discussed, and a focus is made on future research needs., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The Maastro Proton Therapy Centre is the first European facility housing the Mevion S250i Hyperscan synchrocyclotron. The proximity of the accelerator to the patient, the presence of an active pencil beam delivery system downstream of a passive energy degrader and the pulsed structure of the beam make the Mevion stray neutron field unique amongst proton therapy facilities. This paper reviews the results of a rem-counter intercomparison experiment promoted by the European Radiation Dosimetry Group at Maastro and compares them with those at other proton therapy facilities. The Maastro neutron H*(10) in the room (100-200 μSv/Gy at about 2 m from the isocentre) is in line with accelerators using purely passive or wobbling beam delivery modalities, even though Maastro shows a dose gradient peaked near the accelerator. Unlike synchrotron- and cyclotron-based facilities, the pulsed beam at Maastro requires the employment of rem-counters specifically designed to withstand pulsed neutron fields., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)