PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Albrecht M Kellerer

Publications and source records attributed to Albrecht M Kellerer.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Proximity functions for electrons from 100 eV to 10 MeV.

The objective of this study is to provide a set of proximity functions for electrons from 100 eV to 10 MeV. Numerical results of differential proximity functions are given graphically. The complete data set is available electronically upon request from the authors. The results can serve as a convenient database for anyone performing microdosimetric calculations in radiation fields of electrons. For mixed fields of electrons, the proximity functions can easily be derived from the proximity functions of monoenergetic electrons presented here.

Computer Simulation↗
PubMed2006

Indications of the neutron effect contribution in the solid cancer data of the A-bomb survivors.

Risk estimates for radiation-induced cancer are primarily based on the follow-up of the Japanese A-bomb survivors. Their exposures were due to gamma rays and neutrons, and, currently--with the assumed low RBE = 10 of neutrons and reference to the colon dose--the late radiation effects are almost fully attributed to the gamma rays. Solid cancer risk estimates for different organ sites are assessed here, and an inconspicuous but statistically highly significant trend of larger values is found for the organs closer to the body surface; i.e., the organs with less body shielding and, therefore, with larger neutron dose-fractions. Underestimation of the RBE of neutrons can explain this apparent correlation. The trend of ERR/Gy vs. depth ceases to be statistically significant for RBE values close to 100. The suggestion of high RBE values and the corresponding reduction of gamma-ray risk estimates is found to be in line with log-likelihood computations in terms of AMFIT, which provide for the solid cancer mortality of the A-bomb survivors the minimum deviance for RBE = 100 with a 95% confidence lower limit of 25. The present assessment had to use the data made publicly available by RERF. In this form they contain city-, sex-, age-, and dose-categories, but--instead of a separate neutron-dose category--only the mean neutron dose for each data cell. The tentative conclusions that are here obtained should, therefore, be examined by a more definitive analysis, either in terms of grouped data with a separate classification of neutron doses or, ideally, in terms of person by person calculations to be performed at RERF with individually estimated neutron doses.

Body Burden↗
PubMed2005

Radiation quality of photons in small and large receptors--a microdosimetric analysis.

The quality of different photon radiations in small and large receptors is assessed in terms of microdosimetry. Monte Carlo simulations are performed for the electrons released by photons. To represent the case of a small receptor, only electrons released by the non-degraded incident photons are tracked. For a large receptor, all electrons released in the complete degradation process are followed. Dose averaged values, y(D), of the lineal energy are derived from the simulated tracks for monoenergetic photons from 10 keV to 2 MeV. In microdosimetry, the dose mean lineal energy is the major parameter of radiation quality. The results demonstrate distinct differences in radiation quality between high-energy gamma rays and conventional X rays that are present not just in small cell samples but also in large receptors, such as the human body. The values of y(D) suggest that, for both small and large receptors, conventional X rays should be about twice as effective as gamma rays from 60Co.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2005

Are all photon radiations similar in large absorbers?--a comparison of electron spectra.

Conventional X rays, i.e. X rays generating voltage between roughly 150 and 300 kV, are used in many radio-diagnostic procedures and also in radiobiological experiments. They release less energetic and, therefore, more densely ionising electrons than the high-energy gamma rays from 60Co or from the A bombs. Accordingly, they are considered to be somewhat more effective, especially at low doses. Various radiobiological studies, especially studies on chromosome aberrations have confirmed this assumption, but epidemiological investigations, e.g. the comparison of the excess relative risk for mammary cancer in the X-ray exposed patients and in the gamma-ray exposed A bomb survivors, have not demonstrated a similar difference. In view of the missing epidemiological evidence and largely for the reasons of practicality in radiation protection, the ICRP has recommended the radiation weighting factor unity equally for all photon radiations. However, in the discussion preceding the 2005 Recommendations of the ICRP, the issue remains controversial. In a recent paper, Harder et al. argue--with reference to an assessment by the German Radiation Protection Commission (SSK)--that the use of the same weighting factor for different photon energies can be justified more directly. For high-energy incident photons, they present the degraded photon spectra at different depths in a phantom, and they conclude that much of the difference between high-energy gamma rays and conventional X rays disappears in a large phantom. The present assessment, which is more direct, compares the spectra of electrons released (through pair production, Compton effect and photo effect) in a small and in a very large receptor for the incident photons of 150 keV, 1 MeV and 6 MeV. For the 1 Mev and 6 MeV photons, there is a substantial shift towards smaller electron energies in the large receptor, but the electron spectra remain much harder than those from the 150 keV incident photons. Furthermore, it is seen--in agreement with earlier conclusions by Straume--that for the broad gamma-ray spectrum from the A bombs there is no shift at all to lower energies within the body, but rather some degree of hardening of the radiation. The assumption that distinct differences between high-energy gamma rays and conventional X rays are restricted to small samples must, thus, be rejected. The attribution of the same effective quality factor or radiation weighting factor to all photon energies remains, therefore, an issue that is based on the considerations beyond dosimetry.

Body Burden↗
PubMed2004

Cancer risk estimates for gamma-rays with regard to organ-specific doses Part II: site-specific solid cancers.

Part I of this study presented an analysis of the solid cancer mortality data for 1950-1997 from the Japanese life-span study of the A-bomb survivors to assess the cancer risk for gamma-rays in terms of the organ-specific dose for all solid cancers combined. Compared to earlier analyses, considerably more curvature in the dose-effect relation is indicated by these computations, which now suggests a dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor of about 2. The computations are extended here in order to explore the site-specific solid cancer risks for various organs. A computational method has been developed whereby the site-specific cancer risks are all simultaneously computed with global age and gender effect modifiers. This provides a more parsimonious representation with fewer parameters and avoids the large relative standard errors which would otherwise result. The sensitivity of site-specific risks to the choices of the neutron RBE is examined. The site-specific risk estimates are quite sensitive to the neutron RBE for the least shielded organs such as the breast, bladder and oesophagus. For the deeper lying organs, such as the gallbladder, pancreas and uterus, the impact of the neutrons is much lower. With an assumed neutron RBE of 35, which is in line with results on low neutron doses in major past studies on rodents and which corresponds approximately to the current ICRP radiation weighting factor for neutrons, the neutrons appear to contribute about 40% of the observed excess cancer risk in the breast, i.e. the organ that is closest to the body surface. However, this neutron contribution fraction is only about 10% for deeper lying organs, such as the colon.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2004

Cancer risk estimates for gamma-rays with regard to organ-specific doses. Part I: All solid cancers combined.

A previous analysis of the solid cancer mortality data for 1950-1990 from the Japanese life-span study of the A-bomb survivors has assessed the solid cancer risk coefficients for gamma-rays in terms of the low dose risk coefficient ERR/Gy, i.e. the initial slope of the ERR vs. dose relation, and also in terms of the more precisely estimated intermediate dose risk coefficient, ERR(D1)/D1, for a reference dose, D1, which was chosen to be 1 Gy. The computations were performed for tentatively assumed values 20-50 of the neutron RBE against the reference dose and in terms of organ-averaged doses, rather than the traditionally applied colon doses. The resulting risk estimate for a dose of 1 Gy was about half as large as the most recent UNSCEAR estimate. The present assessment repeats the earlier analysis with two major extensions. It parallels computations based on organ-average doses with computations based on organ-specific doses and it updates the previous results by using the cancer mortality data for 1950-1997 which have recently been made available. With an assumed neutron RBE of 35, the resulting intermediate dose estimate of the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) for solid cancer mortality for a working population (ages 25-65 years) is 0.059/Gy with the attained-age model, and 0.044/Gy with the age-at-exposure model. For a population of all ages, 0.055/Gy is obtained with the attained-age model and 0.073/Gy with the age-at-exposure model. These values are up to about 20% higher than those obtained in the previous analysis with the 1950-1990 data. However, considerably more curvature in the dose-effect relation is now supported by the computations. A dose and dose-rate reduction factor DDREF=2 is now much more in line with the data than before. With this factor the LAR for a working population is--averaged over the age-at-exposure and the age-attained model--equal to 0.026/Gy. This is only half as large as the current ICRP estimate which is also based on the assumption DDREF=2.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2004

Weighting factors for radiation quality: how to unite the two current concepts.

The quality factor, Q(L), used to be the universal weighting factor to account for radiation quality, until--in its 1991 Recommendations--the ICRP established a dichotomy between 'computable' and 'measurable' quantities. The new concept of the radiation weighting factor, w(R), was introduced for use with the 'computable' quantities, such as the effective dose, E. At the same time, the application of Q(L) was restricted to 'measurable' quantities, such as the operational quantities ambient dose equivalent or personal dose equivalent. The result has been a dual system of incoherent dosimetric quantities. The most conspicuous inconsistency resulted for neutrons, for which the new concept of wR had been primarily designed. While its definition requires an accounting for the gamma rays produced by neutron capture in the human body, this effect is not adequately reflected in the numerical values of wR, which are now suitable for mice, but are--at energies of the incident neutrons below 1 MeV--conspicuously too large for man. A recent Report 92 to ICRP has developed a proposal to correct the current imbalance and to define a linkage between the concepts Q(L) and wR. The proposal is here considered within a broader assessment of the rationale that led to the current dual system of dosimetric quantities.

Body Burden↗
PubMed2003

Comparative microdosimetry of photoelectrons and Compton electrons: an analysis in terms of generalized proximity functions.

A current discussion on mammography screening is focused on claims of high relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of mammography X rays compared to conventional 200 kV X rays. An earlier assessment in terms of the electron spectra of these radiations has led to the conclusion that the RBE is bound to be less than 2, regardless of specific model assumptions and the microdosimetric properties of electrons. The present study extends this result in terms of the microdosimetric proximity function, t(x), for electrons, which is essentially the spatial auto-correlation function of energy within particle tracks. If pairs of DNA lesions, e.g. chromosome breaks or deletions, bring about the observed damage, the value t(x) determines for a specified radiation the relative frequency of pairs of lesions a distance x apart. The effectiveness of the radiation is thus proportional to an average of the values of t(x) over the distances, x, for which lesions can combine. The analysis suggests that 15 keV electrons can have a low-dose relative biological effectiveness (RBE(M)) of 1.6 relative to 40 keV electrons if the interaction distances do not exceed about 1 micro m. An extension of the concept, the reduced proximity function, t(delta)(x), permits the inclusion of models with an energy threshold, such as delta = 100 eV, 500 eV or 2 keV, for the formation of each of the DNA lesions. This makes it possible to assess the potential impact of the Auger electrons which accompany most photoelectrons, but only a minority of the Compton electrons. It is found that the Auger electrons could make photoelectrons substantially more effective than Compton electrons at energies below 10 keV but not at energies above 15 keV. The conclusions obtained for the RBE of 15 keV electrons relative to 40 keV electrons will be roughly representative of the RBE of mammography X rays relative to conventional 200 kV X rays.

Biophysics↗
PubMed2002

Risk coefficient for gamma-rays with regard to solid cancer.

A previous investigation has uncoupled the solid cancer risk coefficient for neutrons from the low dose estimates of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of neutrons and the photon risk coefficient, and has related it to two more tangible quantities, the excess relative risk (ERR1) due to an intermediate reference dose D1 = 1 Gy of gamma-rays and the RBE of neutrons, R1, against this reference dose. With tentatively assumed RBE values between 20 and 50 and in terms of organ-averaged doses--rather than the usually invoked colon doses--the neutron risk factor was seen to be in general agreement with the current risk estimate of the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP). The present assessment of the risk coefficient for gamma-rays incorporates--in terms of the unchanged A-bomb dosimetry system, DS86--this treatment of the neutrons, but is otherwise largely analogous to the evaluation of the A-bomb data for the ICRP report and for the recent report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the effects of ionizing radiation, UNSCEAR. The resulting central estimate of the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) for solid cancer mortality is 0.043/Gy for a working population (ages 25-65), and is nearly the same whether the age at exposure or the attained age model is used for risk projection. For a population of all ages 0.042/Gy is obtained with the attained age model and 0.068/Gy with the age at exposure model. The values do not include a dose and dose rate effectiveness factor (DDREF), and they are only half as large as the new UNSCEAR estimates of 0.082/Gy (attained age model and all ages) and 0.13/Gy (age at exposure model and all ages). The difference is only partly due to the more explicit treatment of the neutrons. It reflects also the fact that UNSCEAR has converted ERR into LAR in a way that differs from the ICRP procedure, and that it has summed the overall risk coefficient for solid tumor mortality and incidence from separate estimates for eight solid tumor categories, whereas the present study employs a combined computation for all solid tumors and uses the ICRP procedure for the conversion of ERR into LAR. The appendix gives results for the solid cancer incidence data.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Radiation risk--historical perspective and current issues.

The assessment of radiation risk needs to be seen against the background of a historical development that has reversed the initial belief in a general beneficial effect of radiation to apprehension and fear. Numerical risk estimates are, today, based on large epidemiological studies, and the observations on the A-bomb survivors are outlined as the primary source of information. Since the epidemiological findings are obtained from relatively high radiation exposures, extrapolations are required to the much lower doses that are relevant to radiation protection. The evolution of extrapolation procedures up to current attempts at mechanistic modelling is outlined, and some of the open issues are reviewed.

Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation↗
PubMed2002

Electron spectra and the RBE of X rays.

For an assessment of the possible difference in effectiveness between mammography X rays and conventional X rays, the energy and LET spectra of the released electrons are examined. At photon energies below 20 keV and above 100 keV, the energy of the electrons increases with increasing photon energy, which implies that higher-energy photons produce less densely ionizing radiation and are therefore somewhat less effective per unit dose. However, in the intermediate energy range from 20 keV to 100 keV-the range that is relevant to medical diagnostics-the change from the photoelectric effect to the Compton effect causes a transient decrease of electron energies. The ionization density is therefore similar for 200 kVp X rays and 30 kVp mammography X rays, and the distributions of dose in LET suggest an RBE of 30 kVp mammography X rays compared to 200 kVp X rays of up to 1.3. This is in line with an earlier assessment by Brenner and Amols in terms of microdosimetric data, but it is strongly at variance with a recent claim that X rays for mammography are about four times more effective at small doses than conventional X rays and that they cause a correspondingly greater risk for breast cancer. Since LET need not be the only relevant factor, general response functions are examined here that specify-at low dose-the effect per electron of initial energy E and account, for example, for a particular role of the electron range. It is shown that, with any response per electron track that is a nondecreasing function of its starting energy, the low-dose RBE of the mammography X rays relative to the 200 kVp X rays must be substantially less than 2. The Auger electron that accompanies most photoelectrons, but only a minority of the Compton electrons, may increase the effectiveness of the mammography X rays somewhat, but it cannot explain the reported high values of the RBE.

Electrons↗
PubMed2002

Solid cancer risk coefficient for fast neutrons in terms of effective dose.

Cancer mortality risk coefficients for neutrons have recently been assessed by a procedure that postulates for the neutrons a linear dose dependence, invokes the excess risk of the A-bomb survivors at a gamma-ray dose D(1) of 1 Gy, and assumes a neutron RBE as a function of D(1) between 20 and 50. The excess relative risk (ERR) of 0.008/mGy has been obtained for R(1) = 20 and 0.016/mGy for R(1) = 50. To compare these results to the current ICRP nominal risk coefficient for solid cancer mortality (0.045/Sv for a population of all ages; 0.036/Sv for a working population), the ERR is translated into lifetime attributable risk and is then related to effective dose. The conversion is not trivial, because the neutron effective dose has been defined by ICRP not as a weighted genuine neutron dose (neutron kerma), but as a weighted dose that includes the dose from gamma rays that are induced by neutrons in the body. If this is accounted for, the solid cancer mortality risk for a working population is found to agree with the ICRP nominal risk coefficient for neutrons in their most effective energy range, 0.2 MeV to 0.5 MeV. In radiation protection practice, there is an added level of safety, because the effective dose, E, is-for monitoring purposes-assessed in terms of the operational quantity H*, which overestimates E substantially for neutrons between 0.01 MeV and 2 MeV.

Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation↗