ArticleRadiation protection dosimetry2014
Development and validation of an ex vivo electron paramagnetic resonance fingernail biodosimetric method.
Article in Radiation protection dosimetry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Developments in Biodosimetry Methods for Triage With a Focus on X-band Electron Paramagnetic Resonance In Vivo Fingernail Dosimetry.Health physics · 2018Article
- Stability of X-band EPR signals from fingernails under vacuum storage.Radiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993) · 2017Article
- Dielectric-Backed Aperture Resonators for X-Band in vivo EPR Nail Dosimetry.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2016Article
- Using Stable Free Radicals to Obtain Unique and Clinically Useful Data In Vivo in Human Subjects.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2016Review
- Evaluating the Special Needs of The Military for Radiation Biodosimetry for Tactical Warfare Against Deployed Troops: Comparing Military to Civilian Needs for Biodosimetry Methods.Health physics · 2016Article
- Emergency EPR dosimetry technique using vacuum-stored dry nails.Radiation measurements · 2016Article
- Calculation of dose conversion factors for doses in the fingernails to organ doses at external gamma irradiation in air.Radiation measurements · 2015Article
- Advances in a framework to compare bio-dosimetry methods for triage in large-scale radiation events.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2014Article
- Overview of the principles and practice of biodosimetry.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is an imperative need to develop methods that can rapidly and accurately determine individual exposure to radiation for screening (triage) populations and guiding medical treatment in an emergency response to a large-scale radiological/nuclear event. To this end, a number of methods that rely on dose-dependent chemical and/or physical alterations in biomaterials or biological responses are in various stages of development. One such method, ex vivo electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) nail dosimetry using human nail clippings, is a physical biodosimetry technique that takes advantage of a stable radiation-induced signal (RIS) in the keratin matrix of fingernails and toenails. This dosimetry method has the advantages of ubiquitous availability of the dosimetric material, easy and non-invasive sampling, and the potential for immediate and rapid dose assessment. The major challenge for ex vivo EPR nail dosimetry is the overlap of mechanically induced signals and the RIS. The difficulties of analysing the mixed EPR spectra of a clipped irradiated nail were addressed in the work described here. The following key factors lead to successful spectral analysis and dose assessment in ex vivo EPR nail dosimetry: (1) obtaining a thorough understanding of the chemical nature, the decay behaviour, and the microwave power dependence of the EPR signals, as well as the influence of variation in temperature, humidity, water content, and O₂ level; (2) control of the variability among individual samples to achieve consistent shape and kinetics of the EPR spectra; (3) use of correlations between the multiple spectral components; and (4) use of optimised modelling and fitting of the EPR spectra to improve the accuracy and precision of the dose estimates derived from the nail spectra. In the work described here, two large clipped nail datasets were used to test the procedures and the spectral fitting model of the results obtained with it. A 15-donor nail set with 90 nail samples from 15 donors was used to validate the sample handling and spectral analysis methods that have been developed but without the interference of a native background signal. Good consistency has been obtained between the actual RIS and the estimated RIS computed from spectral analysis. In addition to the success in RIS estimation, a linear dose response has also been achieved for all individuals in this study, where the radiation dose ranges from 0 to 6 Gy. A second 16-donor nail set with 96 nail samples was used to test the spectral fitting model where the background signal was included during the fitting of the clipped nail spectra data. Although the dose response for the estimated and actual RIS calculated in both donor nail sets was similar, there was an increased variability in the RIS values that was likely due to the variability in the background signal between donors. Although the current methods of sample handling and spectral analysis show good potential for estimating the RIS in the EPR spectra of nail clippings, there is a remaining degree of variability in the RIS estimate that needs to be addressed; this should be achieved by identifying and accounting for demographic sources of variability in the background nail signal and the composition of the nail matrix.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.