Search

Purpose: In case of a mass-casualty radiological event, there would be a need for networking to overcome surge limitations and to quickly obtain homogeneous results (reported aberration frequencies or estimated doses) among biodosimetry laboratories. These results must be consistent within such network. Inter-laboratory comparisons (ILCs) are widely accepted to achieve this homogeneity. At the European level, a great effort has been made to harmonize biological dosimetry laboratories, notably during the MULTIBIODOSE and RENEB projects. In order to continue the harmonization efforts, the RENEB consortium launched this intercomparison which is larger than the RENEB network, as it involves 38 laboratories from 21 countries. In this ILC all steps of the process were monitored, from blood shipment to dose estimation. This exercise also aimed to evaluate the statistical tools used to compare laboratory performance., Materials and Methods: Blood samples were irradiated at three different doses, 1.8, 0.4 and 0 Gy (samples A, C and B) with 4-MV X-rays at 0.5 Gy min -1 , and sent to the participant laboratories. Each laboratory was requested to blindly analyze 500 cells per sample and to report the observed frequency of dicentric chromosomes per metaphase and the corresponding estimated dose., Results: This ILC demonstrates that blood samples can be successfully distributed among laboratories worldwide to perform biological dosimetry in case of a mass casualty event. Having achieved a substantial harmonization in multiple areas among the RENEB laboratories issues were identified with the available statistical tools, which are not capable to advantageously exploit the richness of results of a large ILCs. Even though Z - and U -tests are accepted methods for biodosimetry ILCs, setting the number of analyzed metaphases to 500 and establishing a tests' common threshold for all studied doses is inappropriate for evaluating laboratory performance. Another problem highlighted by this ILC is the issue of the dose-effect curve diversity. It clearly appears that, despite the initial advantage of including the scoring specificities of each laboratory, the lack of defined criteria for assessing the robustness of each laboratory's curve is a disadvantage for the 'one curve per laboratory' model., Conclusions: Based on our study, it seems relevant to develop tools better adapted to the collection and processing of results produced by the participant laboratories. We are confident that, after an initial harmonization phase reached by the RENEB laboratories, a new step toward a better optimization of the laboratory networks in biological dosimetry and associated ILC is on the way.

Purpose: In the frame of the QA program of RENEB, an inter-laboratory comparison (ILC) of calibration sources used in biological dosimetry was achieved to investigate the influence of calibration practices and protocols on the results of the dose estimation performance as a first step to harmonization and standardization of dosimetry and irradiation practices in the European biological dosimetry network., Materials and Methods: Delivered doses by irradiation facilities used by RENEB partners were determined with EPR/alanine dosimetry system. Dosimeters were irradiated in the same conditions as blood samples. A short survey was also performed to collect the information needed for the data analysis and evaluate the diversity of practices., Results: For most of partners the deviation of delivered dose from the targeted dose remains below 10%. Deviations larger than 10% were observed for five facilities out of 21. Origins of the largest discrepancies were identified. Correction actions were evaluated as satisfactory. The re-evaluation of some ILC results for the fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and premature chromosome condensation (PCC) assays has been performed leading to an improvement of the overall performances., Conclusions: This work has shown the importance of dosimetry in radiobiology studies and the needs of harmonization, standardization in irradiation and dosimetry practices and educational training for biologists using ionizing radiation.

Purpose: RENEB, 'Realising the European Network of Biodosimetry and Physical Retrospective Dosimetry,' is a network for research and emergency response mutual assistance in biodosimetry within the EU. Within this extremely active network, a number of new dosimetry methods have recently been proposed or developed. There is a requirement to test and/or validate these candidate techniques and inter-comparison exercises are a well-established method for such validation., Materials and Methods: The authors present details of inter-comparisons of four such new methods: dicentric chromosome analysis including telomere and centromere staining; the gene expression assay carried out in whole blood; Raman spectroscopy on blood lymphocytes, and detection of radiation-induced thermoluminescent signals in glass screens taken from mobile phones., Results: In general the results show good agreement between the laboratories and methods within the expected levels of uncertainty, and thus demonstrate that there is a lot of potential for each of the candidate techniques., Conclusions: Further work is required before the new methods can be included within the suite of reliable dosimetry methods for use by RENEB partners and others in routine and emergency response scenarios.

The bottleneck in data acquisition during biological dosimetry based on a dicentric assay is the need to score dicentrics in a large number of lymphocytes. One way to increase the capacity of a given laboratory is to use the ability of skilled operators from other laboratories. This can be done using image analysis systems and distributing images all around the world. Two exercises were conducted to test the efficiency of such an approach involving 10 laboratories. During the first exercise (E1), the participant laboratories analysed the same images derived from cells exposed to 0.5 and 3 Gy; 100 images were sent to all participants for both doses. Whatever the dose, only about half of the cells were complete with well-spread metaphases suitable for analysis. A coefficient of variation (CV) on the standard deviation of ∼15 % was obtained for both doses. The trueness was better for 3 Gy (0.6 %) than for 0.5 Gy (37.8 %). The number of estimated doses classified as satisfactory according to the z-score was 3 at 0.5 Gy and 8 at 3 Gy for 10 dose estimations. In the second exercise, an emergency situation was tested, each laboratory was required to score a different set of 50 images in 2 d extracted from 500 downloaded images derived from cells exposed to 0.5 Gy. Then the remaining 450 images had to be scored within a week. Using 50 different images, the CV on the estimated doses (79.2 %) was not as good as in E1, probably associated to a lower number of cells analysed (50 vs. 100) or from the fact that laboratories analysed a different set of images. The trueness for the dose was better after scoring 500 cells (22.5 %) than after 50 cells (26.8 %). For the 10 dose estimations, the number of doses classified as satisfactory according to the z-score was 9, for both 50 and 500 cells. Overall, the results obtained support the feasibility of networking using electronically transmitted images. However, before its implementation some issues should be elucidated, such as the number and resolution of the images to be sent, and the harmonisation of the scoring criteria. Additionally, a global website able to be used for the different regional networks, like Share Points, will be desirable to facilitate worldwide communication.