ArticleScientific reports2023
Effects of low-dose ionizing radiation on genomic instability in interventional radiology workers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radon-Induced Radiation Biomarkers: A Scoping Review from Exposure Dosimetry to Early Biological Effects on the Lung.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Occupational Hazards in Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories: Radiation and Beyond-ANMCO Position Paper Update 2026.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Low-dose X-Ray induced genetic damage in human peripheral blood lymphocytes.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- From survival of irradiated mice to modern molecular insights: a seventy-year journey in radiobiology at the institute of biophysics, Czech academy of sciences.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2025Review
- Robotic radiation shielding system reduces radiation-induced DNA damage in operators performing electrophysiological procedures.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Micronucleus abnormalities and sex differences in medical staff exposed to occupational ionizing radiation: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Label-free monitoring of embolotherapy via catheter electrochemical impedance spectroscopy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interventional radiologists are chronically exposed to low-dose ionizing radiation (IR), which may represent a health risk. The aim of the present study was to evaluate genomic instability by analyzing chromosomal aberrations, micronuclei, and 53BP1 DNA repair foci in peripheral blood lymphocytes of radiologists. Based on the IAEA guidelines on biodosimetry using dicentrics, the average protracted whole-body dose in radiologists were estimated. Since preleukemic fusion genes (PFG) are the primary events leading to leukemia, we also studied their presence by RT-qPCR and FISH. No significant difference in 53BP1 foci and incidence of PFG (MLL-AF4, MLL-AF9, AML1-ETO, BCR-ABL p190) was found in cells of interventional radiologists in comparison to controls. However, our results showed an increased frequency of micronuclei and various types of chromosomal aberrations including dicentrics in interventional radiologists. The average protracted whole body estimated dose was defined at 452.63 mGy. We also found a significantly higher amplification of the MLL gene segment and increased RNA expression in cells of interventional radiologists in comparison to controls. In conclusion, our results showed that long-term low-dose IR induces genomic instability in interventional radiologists.
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.