JOURNAL DESCRIPTION
The Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety journal ISSN 1024-6177 was founded in January 1956 (before December 30, 1993 it was entitled Medical Radiology, ISSN 0025-8334). In 2018, the journal received Online ISSN: 2618-9615 and was registered as an electronic online publication in Roskomnadzor on March 29, 2018. It publishes original research articles which cover questions of radiobiology, radiation medicine, radiation safety, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine and scientific reviews. In general the journal has more than 30 headings and it is of interest for specialists working in thefields of medicine¸ radiation biology, epidemiology, medical physics and technology. Since July 01, 2008 the journal has been published by State Research Center - Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency. The founder from 1956 to the present time is the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, and from 2008 to the present time is the Federal Medical Biological Agency.
Members of the editorial board are scientists specializing in the field of radiation biology and medicine, radiation protection, radiation epidemiology, radiation oncology, radiation diagnostics and therapy, nuclear medicine and medical physics. The editorial board consists of academicians (members of the Russian Academy of Science (RAS)), the full member of Academy of Medical Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, corresponding members of the RAS, Doctors of Medicine, professor, candidates and doctors of biological, physical mathematics and engineering sciences. The editorial board is constantly replenished by experts who work in the CIS and foreign countries.
Six issues of the journal are published per year, the volume is 13.5 conventional printed sheets, 88 printer’s sheets, 1.000 copies. The journal has an identical full-text electronic version, which, simultaneously with the printed version and color drawings, is posted on the sites of the Scientific Electronic Library (SEL) and the journal's website. The journal is distributed through the Rospechat Agency under the contract № 7407 of June 16, 2006, through individual buyers and commercial structures. The publication of articles is free.
The journal is included in the List of Russian Reviewed Scientific Journals of the Higher Attestation Commission. Since 2008 the journal has been available on the Internet and indexed in the RISC database which is placed on Web of Science. Since February 2nd, 2018, the journal "Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety" has been indexed in the SCOPUS abstract and citation database.
Brief electronic versions of the Journal have been publicly available since 2005 on the website of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal: http://www.medradiol.ru. Since 2011, all issues of the journal as a whole are publicly available, and since 2016 - full-text versions of scientific articles. Since 2005, subscribers can purchase full versions of other articles of any issue only through the National Electronic Library. The editor of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal in accordance with the National Electronic Library agreement has been providing the Library with all its production since 2005 until now.
The main working language of the journal is Russian, an additional language is English, which is used to write titles of articles, information about authors, annotations, key words, a list of literature.
Since 2017 the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety has switched to digital identification of publications, assigning to each article the identifier of the digital object (DOI), which greatly accelerated the search for the location of the article on the Internet. In future it is planned to publish the English-language version of the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety for its development. In order to obtain information about the publication activity of the journal in March 2015, a counter of readers' references to the materials posted on the site from 2005 to the present which is placed on the journal's website. During 2015 - 2016 years on average there were no more than 100-170 handlings per day. Publication of a number of articles, as well as electronic versions of profile monographs and collections in the public domain, dramatically increased the number of handlings to the journal's website to 500 - 800 per day, and the total number of visits to the site at the end of 2017 was more than 230.000.
The two-year impact factor of RISC, according to data for 2017, was 0.439, taking into account citation from all sources - 0.570, and the five-year impact factor of RISC - 0.352.
Issues journals
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 1
Radiation-Hygienic Investigations of Experimental Production
of Mixed NitrideUranium-Plutonium Fuel at JSC SChC.
Part 2: Doses and Risks
L.A. Ilin1, A.S. Samoilov1, A.G. Tsovyanov1, S.M. Shinkarev1,
N.K. Shandala1, P.P. Gantsovsky1, A.E. Karev1, B.A. Kukhta1,
A.V. Simakov1, Klochkov V.N.1, Korenkov I.P.1, A.M. Lyaginskaya1,
O.V. Parinov1, V.K. Ivanov2, S.Yu. Chekin2, A.N. Menyailo2,
K.A. Tumanov2, V.M. Solomatin3, K.M. Izmestyev4
1 A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia
2 A.F. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre, Obninsk, Russia
3 JSC «Proryv», Moscow, Russia
4 JSC “Siberian Chemical Combine”, Seversk, Russia
Contact person: Alexander Georgievich Tsovyanov: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Assessment of the compliance of the radiation protection of workers at the complex experimental installations of JSC SChC with the requirements of the Russian radiation safety standards NRB-99/2009 to limit the generalized risk of potential exposure and the IAEA recommendations for not exceeding the control level of the minimum significant radiation risk.
Materials and methods: The results of radiation-hygienic investigations of radiation exposure factors affecting workers involved in the manufacture of mixed uranium-plutonium nitride (MUPN) fuel at the complex experimental installations of JSC SChC are used as the input data for the preliminary assessment of radiation doses to workers. The models for assessment of radiation risk of potential exposure have been developed in accordance with the recommendations of the ICRP and the IAEA.
Results: Preliminary estimates of the doses of external gamma-neutron (2.5 ± 0.5 mSv / year) and internal exposure of workers (~1 mSv/year1) are related to the current levels of exposure of workers of complex experimental installations. These levels are the result of exposure to ionizing radiation sources associated both with the development of new technologies and with residual radioactive contamination resulting from previous activities not related to the manufacture of MUPN fuel. The presented dose estimates are related to the use of raw materials that have undergone deep preliminary purification from radiogenic impurities. When irradiated nuclear materials are used as raw materials, the levels of gamma-neutron exposure to workers will be significantly higher. The maximum increase in the generalized risk of potential exposure due to annual exposure is estimated for women aged 18 years at the beginning of exposure, for which the increase in this risk is 1.45 × 10-4 year-1, which is 1.37 times lower than the limit established by the Russian radiation safety standards NRB-99/2009: 2 × 10-4 year-1. All predicted values of the lifetime attributable fraction of radiation (LARF) in mortality from malignant neoplasms are significantly less than the control level of the minimum significant risk recommended by the IAEA (LARF = 5 %), and the maximum value of LARF = 2.8 % is achieved for women aged 18 years at the beginning of exposure.
Conclusion: Restrictions on the radiation risks of potential exposure, established by NRB-99/2009, as well as those recommended by the IAEA for not exceeding the reference level of the minimum significant risk, are met with a large reserve. The results obtained and the developed methods will be used to ensure the radiation safety of workers during the transition from experimental installations to pilot industrial implementation of the technology for the production of MUPN fuel.
Keywords: mixed nitride uranium-plutonium fuel, radiation safety, complex experimental installation, radiation dose to workers, radiation risk, generalized risk of potential exposure
For citation: Ilin LA, Samoilov AS, Tsovyanov AG, Shinkarev SM, Shandala NK, Gantsovsky PP, Karev AE, Kukhta BA, Simakov AV, Klochkov VN, Korenkov IP, Lyaginskaya AM, Parinov OV, Ivanov VK, Chekin SYu, Menyailo AN, Tumanov KA, Solomatin VM, Izmestyev KM. Radiation-Hygienic Investigations оf Experimental Production оf Mixed Nitride Uranium-Plutonium Fuel at JSC SChC. Part 2: Doses and Risks. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(1):39-45.
DOI: 10.12737/1024-6177-2022-67-1-39-45
References
1. Adamov Ye.O., Dzhalavyan A.V., Lopatkin A.V., Molokanov N.A., Muravyev Ye.V., Orlov V.V., Kalyakin S.G., Rachkov V.I., Troyanov V.M., Avronin Ye.N., Ivanov V.B., Aleksakhin R.M. Conceptual Provisions of the Strategy for the Development of Nuclear Power in Russia in the Long Term Up to 2100. Atomnaya energiya = Atomic energy. 2012;112;6:319-330 (In Russ.).
2. Ed. Ivanov V.K., Adamov E.O. New Generation Nuclear Power: Radiological Consistency and Environmental Benefits. Moscow, Pero Publ., 2019. 379 p. (In Russ.).
3. European Commission, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Atomic Energy Agency, International Labour Organization, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Pan American Health Organization, United Nations Environment Programme, World Health Organization, Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3, IAEA, Vienna, 2014.
4. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyaylo A.N., Maksyutov M.A., Tumanov K.A., Kashcheyeva P.V., Lovachev S.S., Adamov Ye.O., Lopatkin A.V. Levels of Radiological Protection of the Public Under Implementation of the Principle of Radiation Equivalence: a Risk-Based Approach. Radiatsiya i Risk = Radiation and Risk. 2018;27;3:9-23 (In Russ.).
5. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyaylo A.N., Maksyutov M.A., Tumanov K.A., Kashcheyeva P.V., Lovachev S.S., Adamov YE.O., Lopatkin A.V. Radiation and Radiological Equivalence of Radioactive Waste in Two-Component Nuclear Power. Radiatsiya i Risk = Radiation and Risk. 2019;28;1:5-25 (In Russ.).
6. Chekin S.Yu., Menyaylo A.N., Lovachev S.S., Seleva N.G., Korelo A.M., Tumanov K.A., Ivanov V.K. Assessment of Potential Radiological Risks of the Public under Implementation of the "Proryv" Project of the State Atomic Energy Corporation "Rosatom". Part 1. ICRP Recommendations. Radiatsiya i Risk = Radiation and Risk. 2020;29;4:33-47 (In Russ.).
7. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyaylo A.N., Lovachev S.S., Seleva N.G., Bakin R.I., Ilyichev Ye.A., Kiselev A.A., Solomatin V.M., Adamov Ye.O., Lemekhov V.V., Proukhin A.V. Assessment of Potential Radiological Risks of the Public under Implementation of the "Proryv" Project of the State Atomic Energy Corporation "Rosatom". Part 2. Determination of Radiological Detriment. Radiatsiya i Risk = Radiation and Risk. 2020;29;4:48-68 (In Russ.).
8. Ilyin L.A., Samoylov A.S., Tsovyanov A.G., Shinkarev S.M., Shandala N.K., Gantsovskiy P.P., Karev A.YE., Kukhta B.A., Simakov A.V., Klochkov V.N., Korenkov I.P., Lyaginskaya A.M., Parinov O.V., Solomatin V.M., Izmestyev K.M. Radiation-Hygienic Investigations of Experimental Production of Mixed Nitride Uranium-Plutonium Fuel at JSC SChC. Part 1. Methods and Results. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2021;5:23-32 (In Russ.).
9. Radiation Safety Standards NRB-99/2009. Sanitary Rules and Standards SanPiN 2.6.1.2523 - 09. Moscow, Publ., 2009. 100 p. (In Russ.).
10. The Fukushima Daiichi Accident. Technical Volume 4/5: Radiological Consequences. Vienna, International Atomic Energy Agency, 2015. 250 p.
11. MU 2.6.5.028-2016. 2.6.5. Nuclear Energy and Industry. Determination of Individual Effective and Equivalent Doses and Organization of Control of Occupational Exposure Under Conditions of Planned Exposure. General Requirements. Methodical Instructions. Methodological Support of Radiation Monitoring in the Nuclear Industry. Moscow, NPP "Doza" Publ., 2016. V.1. P.41-117 (In Russ.).
12. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). Effects of Ionizing Radiation. V. 1. UNSCEAR 2006 Report to the General Assembly, Scientific Annexes A and B. New York, United Nations, 2008. 383 p.
13. Kellerer A.M., Nekolla E.A., Walsh L. On the Conversion of Solid Cancer Excess Relative Risk into Lifetime Attributable Risk. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2001;40;4:249-257.
14. The 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP. 2007;37;2–4:1–332.
15. Menyaylo A.N., Chekin S.Yu., Kashcheyev V.V., Maksyutov M.A., Korelo A.M., Tumanov K.A., Pryakhin Ye.A., Lovachev S.S., Karpenko S.V., Kashcheyeva P.V., Ivanov V.K. Lifetime Radiation Risk from External and Internal Exposure: an Assessment Method. Radiatsiya i Risk = Radiation and Risk. 2018;27;1: 8-21 (In Russ.).
16. Ivanov V.K., Karpenko S.V., Kashcheyev V.V., Lovachev S.S., Kashcheyeva P.V., Shchukina N.V., Tumanov K.A., Kochergina YE.V., Maksyutov M.A. Dependence of the Minimum Detectable Dose Level of Radiation Risks of Cancer Versus the Observation Period in a Cohort of Russian Liquidators of the Chernobyl Accident. Radiatsiya i Risk = Radiation and Risk. 2018;27;3:32-41 (In Russ.).
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 23.12.2020.
Accepted for publication: 20.01.2021.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 1
Reference and Information Complex REGISTR
of the Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine
of the FMBA of Russia
N.V. Startsev1, E.A. Shishkina1,2, E.A. Blinova1,2, A.V. Akleyev1,2
1 Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Chelyabinsk, Russia
2 Chelyabinsk State University, Chelyabinsk, Russia
Contact person: Startsev Nikolay Valerievich: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Currently, the Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine has collected arrays of socio-demographic, dosimetric and medical and biological information. The manuscript presents reference and information complex REGISTR recently developed in the URCRM to optimize the use of multiple registers and data bases. The development of reference and information complex enabled to significantly increase the use of various information resources, and provides strategic planning of new integral studies. A description of archive and actual registers and data bases of the URCRM scientific departments is presented in the manuscript. The issues of possible integration of information saved in various formats were addressed. The manuscript shows that a unified system of coding patients can be treated as a way of integration of information. The manuscript contains a capability description of reference and information complex REGISTR for facilitating research planning and possibility of integration of information obtained in different URCRM scientific departments. A technical implementation of the complex development was described. The article shows an illustration of how the REGISTR complex was used for planning of the research performed in the Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Radiobiology. The development direction of REGISTR complex was considered.
Keywords: information complex REGISTR, data base, specialized registers, integration of information, personal data protection, development prospects
For citation: Startsev NV, Shishkina EA, Blinova EA, Akleyev AV. Reference and Information Complex REGISTR of the Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine of the FMBA of Russia. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(1):46-53.
DOI: 10.12737/1024-6177-2022-67-1-46-53
References
1. Reznik N.A. Search Scheme Drawing up Flow of Scientific Articles Based on E-Library and RINTS. Sustainable Development of Science and Eduction. 2017;3:172-184 (In Russ.).
2. Haried P., Claybaugh C., Dai H. Evaluation of Health Information Systems Research in Information Systems Research: A Meta-Analysis. Health Informatics J. 2019;25;1:186-202. DOI: 10.1177/1460458217704259.
3. Dennis A. Benson, Karen Clark, Ilene Karsch-Mizrachi, David J. Lipman, James Ostell, Eric W. Sayers. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Research. 2015;43;D1:D30–D35. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku1216 (as of 24.06.2021).
4. Ed. Akleyev A.V. Consequences of Radioactive Contamination of the Techa River. Chelyabinsk, Kniga Publ., 2016. 390 p. (In Russ.).
5. Akleyev A.V. Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine – Radiation Safety Guard of the Urals. Kto yest kto v meditsine = Who is Who in Medicine. 2014;2:16-17 (In Russ.).
6. Akhmadullina Yu.R., Vozilova A.V. Akleyev A.V. Study of the DNA Damage in Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes Using Micronucleus Test in Residents of the Techa Riverside Villages Who Were Chronically Exposed in Utero and Postnatally. Genetika = Russian Journal of Genetics 2020;56:463-470 (In Russ.).
7. Blinova E.A., Akleyev A.V. Association of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in DNA Repair Genes with the Risk of Malignant Neoplasm Development in Persons Exposed to Chronic Radiation. Meditsina ekstremalnykh situatsiy = Extreme Medicine. 2017;61;3:104-109 (In Russ.).
8. Shalaginov S.A., Krestinina L.Yu., Startsev N.V., Akleyev A.V. Peculiarities of the Resettlement of the First Generation Offspring of the Exposed Techa River Population. Radiatsionnaya gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2017;10;2:6-15 (In Russ.).
9. Krestinina L.Yu., Silkin S.S., Degteva M.O., Akleyev A.V. Risk analysis of the mortality from the diseases of the circulatory system in the Ural cohort of emergency-irradiated population for the years 1950–2015. Radiatsionnaya gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2019;12;1:52-61 (In Russ.).
10. Akleyev A.V., Varfolomeyeva T.A., Blinova E.A., Kotikova A.I., Nikiforov V.S., Akleyev A.A., Tryapitsyna G.A., Pryakhin E.A., Pastukhova E.I., Shalaginov S.A. Ways to Adopt to Low-Dose Radiation. Chelyabinsk State University, Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine. St. Petersburg, SpetsLit, 2019. 111 p. (In Russ.).
11. Khaitov R.M., Alekseev L.P., Akleyev A.V., Trofimov D.Yu., Kofiadi I.A. Search for Immunogenetic Polymorphisms Associated to Radiation Effect is a Way to Improve State Biosafety. Fiziologiya i patologiya immunnoy sistemy. 2012;16;10:3-15 (In Russ.).
12. Akleyev A.V., Dimov G.P., Varfolomeyeva T.A. The Status of Hematopoiesis in Residents of the Techa Riverside Settlements in the Period of Maximum Radiation Exposure. Report 2. Assessment of the Effect of Dose and Dose-Rate to Red Bone Marrow and Modifying Factors on the Frequency of Cytopenias and Cytoses. Radiatsionnaya Biologiya. Radioekologiya = Radiation biology. Radioecology. 2012;52;2:130 (In Russ.).
13. Mikryukova L.D., Shalaginov S.A. Eye Disorders Occurred in People Chronically Exposed to Low Dose Radiation as the Results of Radiological Incidents in the Southern Ural. Radiatsiya i risk. Byulleten Natsionalnogo Radiatsionno-Epidemiologicheskogo Registra = Radiation and Risk. Bulletin of the National Radiation and Epidemiological Registry. 2020;29;4:84-96 (In Russ.).
14. Degteva M.O., Napier B.A., Tolstykh E.I., Shishkina E.A., Bugrov N.G., Krestinina L.Yu., Akleyev A.V. Individual Dose Distribution in Cohort of People Exposed as a Result of Radioactive Contamination of the Techa River. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2019;64;3:46-53 (In Russ.).
15. Development and Organization of the Computer Database of Dosimetric, Demographic, and Medical Follow-Up of the Population Affected by Radiation Exposure Due to Uranium Fission Products. Research Report (Concluding). URCRM. Chelyabinsk Publ., 1985 (In Russ.).
16. Development of the Unified Information System «Radiation Situation and Health of the Population in the Area of Mayak PA Location». Research Report (Concluding)/URCRM. Chelyabinsk Publ., 1993. 85 p. (In Russ.).
17. Improvement of the Information System «Radiation Situation and Health of the Population in the Area of Mayak PA Location». Research Report (Concluding). URCRM. Chelyabinsk Publ., 1996, 81 p. (In Russ.).
18. Ed. Akleyev A.V., Kiselev M.F. Medical-Biological and Ecological Impacts of Radioactive Contamination of the Techa River. Moscow, 2001. 532 p. (In Russ.).
19. Startsev N.V., Shalonin D.G., Cragle D., Clein A., Akleyev A.V. Provision of the Physical Security of the Archive Material of the Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2001;6:107-112 (In Russ.).
20. Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Part 4. Dated 18.12.2006 N 230-Federal Law. (Rev. as of 18.07.2019) (In Russ.).
21. Shishkina E.A., Tokareva E.E., Bugrov N.G., Sharagin P.A., Tolstykh E.I., Degteva M.O. Reduction of the Uncertainty of the 90Sr, 137Cs and 40K Body Burden Measurements for Human with the Whole -Body Counter SICH¬9.1M. ANRI. 2017;3:25-41 (In Russ.).
22. Blinova E.A., Akleyev A.А. Genetic Markers Associated with the Risk of Developing Carcinogenic Effects of the Exposure. Educating Future Holders of Master’s Degree: Challenges and Future Development. Abstracts of the Proceedings of the 3rd All-Russian Conference. 2019. P. 93-95 (In Russ.).
23. Blinova E.A., Diusenova R.D., Ianishevskaia M.A., Akleyev A.V. Association of the Polymorphic Variants of Reparation Genes with the Risk of Solid Tumors Development in Chronically Exposed Persons. Current Problems in Radiation Genetics. Proceedings of the Two-day International Conference. 2019. P. 28-30 (In Russ.).
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 17.07.2021.
Accepted for publication: 05.09.2021
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 1
Analysis of the Risk of Death from cerebrovascular Disease of
Liquidators of the Consequences of the Accident at the Chernobyl NPP, Employees of the Atomic Industry
I.L. Shafransky, A.R. Tukov, O.N. Prohorova, M.V. Kalinina
A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: Tukov Alexander Romanovich, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Assessment of the risk of death of the liquidators of the Chernobyl accident from cerebrovascular diseases.
Material and methods: The risk of death of liquidators of the Chernobyl accident from cerebrovascular diseases (ICD 10: I60-I69.9) was estimated using the Industry Register of persons exposed to radiation as a result of the Chernobyl accident over a thirty-year period, with a verified dose of external exposure obtained by operating in the 30 km zone of the Chernobyl NPP. The study included men - 12,663 people, 1327 of them have a dose of occupational exposure. Rough relative risks of mortality from cerebrovascular diseases were evaluated for five dose groups based on internal control. At the second stage of the study, all data were stratified by age, dose load and Follow up period. Based on the obtained stratified data file, the Poisson regression procedure was carried out, for which the Epicure AMFIT module was used and the magnitude of the excess relative risk (ERR) of death from cerebrovascular diseases was calculated and the nature of the dose dependence of EI was investigated. A cohort epidemiological study of a group of liquidators of 1986-1990 was conducted over a thirty-year period, depending on the dose, both obtained during the liquidation of the consequences of the Chernobyl accident and during work with radioactive substances (RS) in the profession.
Results: For the first time, direct estimates of the radiogenic risk of death from cerebrovascular diseases have been obtained. A risk decrease in this type of death per unit dose was shown for dose loads implemented during the liquidation of the consequences of the Chernobyl accident and professional doses too.
Conclusion: Liquidators in the long-term after the work on eliminating the consequences of the accident need generally accepted medical care approaches aimed at preventing and treating such common diseases as cardiovascular diseases. The results can be used in the development of radiation safety regulation.
Keywords: radiation, risk of death, relative risk, cerebrovascular disease, the Chernobyl accident, EPICURE, AMFIT, ROSATOM, radiation safety
For citation: Shafransky IL, Tukov AR, Prohorova ON, Kalinina MV. Analysis of the Risk of Death from cerebrovascular Disease of Liquidators of the Consequences of the Accident at the Chernobyl NPP, Employees of the Atomic Industry. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(1):60-64.
DOI: 10.12737/1024-6177-2022-67-1-60-64
References
1. Dale LP., Shimizu Y, Donald AP, Akihiko Suyamac A, Mabuchi K. Studies of Mortality of Atomic Bomb Survivors. Report 13: Solid Cancer and Noncancer Disease Mortality: 1950–1997. Radiation Research, 2003, vol. 160, P. 381–407.
2. Шантырь И.И., Астафьев О.М., Макарова Н.В. Состояние здоровья ликвидаторов последствий аварии на Чернобыльской АЭС: (По материалам Сев.–Зап. регион. центра Рос. гос. мед. дозиметр. рег.)// Всеросс. центр экстр. и радиац. медицины МЧС России. – СПб.: Сев.–Зап. регион. центр РГМДР. 2002. 112 с. [Shantyr I.I., Astafiev O.M., Makarova N.V. The health of liquidators of the consequences of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant: (based on the materials of Naz.-Zap. Region. The center of Ros. Gos. Honey. Dosimeter. Reg.). Vseros. Center Exp. and radiats. Medicine EMERCOM of Russia. - SPb.: Sev.-Zap. region. Center RGMDR. 2002; 112. (In Russian)]
3. Sevan’kaev AV, Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Moiseenko VV. High exposures to radiation received by workers inside the Chernobyl sarcophagus. Radiat. Protect. Dosim., 1995, vol. 59, no. 2, P. 85–91.
4. Ivanov V, Maksioutov MA, Chekin SY, Petrov AV, Biryukov AP, Kruglova ZG, Matyash VA, Tsyb AF, Manton KG, Kravchenko JS. The risk of radiation-induced cerebrovascular disease in Chernobyl emergency workers. Health Phys. 2006; 90:199–207.
5. Білий Д.О., Настіна О.М., Габулавічене Ж.М., Сидоренко Г.В., Базика О.Д., Білая В.В., Ковальов О.С. Фактори радіаційної і нерадіаційної природи та їх вплив на перебіг ішемічної хвороби серця у учасників ліквідації наслідків Чорнобильської аварії. // Проблеми радіаційної медицини та радіобіології. - 2014. -Вип. 19. - С. 213-222. [Bilij D.O., Nastina O.M., Gabulavichene Zh.M., Sidorenko G.V., Bazika O.D., Bilaya V.V., Kovalov O.S.Factors of radiation and non-radiation nature and their influence on the course of ischemic heart disease in the participants in the elimination of the consequences of the Chernobyl accident. Problems of radiation medicine and radiobiology. 2014; 19: 213-222.]
6. Бузунов В.О., Прикащикова К.Є., Губіна І.Г., Костюк Г.В., Терещенко С.О. Смертність від хвороб системи кровообігу мешканців радіоактивно забруднених територій унаслідок аварії на ЧАЕС за 1988–2010 роки спостереження залежно від доз радіаційного опромінення, статі. // Проблеми радіаційної медицини та радіобіології. - 2013. - Вип. 18. - C. 50-58. [Buzunov V.O., Prikashhikova K.Ye., Gubina I`.G., Kostyuk G.V., Tereshhenko S.O. Mortality of diseases of the circulatory system of radioactive contaminated territories as a result of the Chernobyl accident for 1988-2010 observation depending on doses of radiation irradiation, gender. Problems of radiation medicine and radiobiology. 2013; Ed. 18: 50-58.]
7. Бузунов В.О., Прикащикова К.Є., Костюк Г.В., Губіна І.Г., Терещенко С.О. Смертність від хвороб системи кровообігу мешканців радіоактивно забруднених територій України внаслідок аварії на ЧАЕС залежно від доз радіаційного опромінення та віку. 1988-2010 роки спостереження // Проблеми радіаційної медицини та радіобіології. - 2014. - Ed. 19. - C. 59-66. [Buzunov V.O., Prikashhikova K.Ye., Kostyuk G.V., Gubina I`.G., Tereshhenko S.O. Mortality of diseases of the circulatory system of radioactive contaminated territories of Ukraine as a result of the Chernobyl accident depending on doses of radiation irradiation and age. 1988-2010 Observation. Problems of radiation medicine and radiobiology. 2014; Ed. 19: 59-66.]
8. Muirhead CR, O’Hagan JA, Haylock RGE, Phillipson MA, Willcock T, Berridge GLC, Zhang W. Mortality and cancer incidence following occupational radiation exposure: third analysis of the National Registry for Radiation Workers. British Journal of Cancer. 2009; vol. 100: 206 – 212.
9. Krauser M, Kreisheimer M, Kandel M. Mortality from cardio-vascular diseases in the German uranium miners cohort study 1946-1998. Rad Env Biophysics. 2006.
10. Azizova TV, Colin R, Muirhead Maria B,. Moseeva Evgenia S, Grigoryeva Margarita V, Sumina J, O’Hagan JA., Wei Zhang R.J., Haylock G.E., Hunter N. Cerebrovascular diseases in nuclear workers first employed at the Mayak PA in 1948–1972. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2011; vol. 50: 539–552.
11. Azizova T.V., Muirhead C.R., Moseeva M.B. Ischemic heart disease in nuclear workers first employed at the Mayak PA in 1948–1972. Health Phys. 2012; vol. 103, 1: 3–14.
12. Moseeva M.B., Azizova T.V., Grigorieva E.S., Haylock R. Risk of circulatory diseases among Mayak PA workers with radiation doses estimated using the improved Mayak Workers Dosimetry System 2008. Rad. Environ. Biophys. 2014;vol. 53, 2: 469–477.
13. Little MP, Tawn EJ, Tzoulaki I, Wakeford R, Hildebrandt G, Paris F, Tapio S, Elliotta P. A Systematic Review of Epidemiological Associations between Low and Moderate Doses of Ionizing Radiation and Late Cardiovascular Effects, and Their Possible Mechanisms. Radiation Research. 2008; vol. 169: 99–109.
14. Little MP, Azizova TV, Bazyka D. Systematic review and meta-analysis of circulatory disease from exposure to low-level ionizing radiation and estimates of potential population mortality risks. Environ. Health Perspect. 2012; vol. 120: 1503–1511.
15. Vrijheid M, Cardis E, Ashmore P, Auvinen A, Bae J-M, Engels H, Gilbert E, Gulis G, Habib RR, Howe G, Kurtinaitis J, Malker H, Muirhead CR, Richardson DB, Rodriguez-Artalejo F, Rogel A, Schubauer-Berigan M, Tardy H, Telle-Lamberton M, Usel M, Veress K. Mortality from diseases other than cancer following low doses of ionizing radiation: results from the 15-Country Study of nuclear industry workers. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2007; vol. 36:1126–1135.
16. Preston DL, Lubin JH, Pierce DA, McConney ME. Epicure, User's Guide. HiroSoft International Corporation. Seattle, WA 98112, USA. 1993; 329.
17. Метляева Н.А., Бушманов А.Ю., Краснюк В.И., Щербатых О.В., Болотнов М.В. Радиация и стресс. Обзор научных публикаций о реакции человека на воздействие ионизирующего излучения // Медицинская радиология и радиационная безопасность. 2016. № 5, C. 48-54. [Metlyaeva N.A., Bushmanov A.Yu., Krasnyuk V.I., Shherbatykh O.V., Bolotnov M.V. Radiation and stress. Review of scientific publications on a person's reaction to the impact of ionizing radiation. Medical radiology and radiation safety . 2016; No. 5: 48-54.(In Russian)]
18. Kazuo, Shozo S. Medical X-ray Doses' Contributions to the Ionizing Radiation Exposures of Atomic-Bomb Survivors. Journal of Radiation Research, Vol. 32, Issue Suppl_1, 1 March 1991: 136–153.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 05.06.2021.
Accepted for publication: 15.12.2021
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 1
Dose Assessment to the Lens of the Eye and Skin of the Personnel
in Advanced Medical Technologies
Korenkov I.P.1, Okhrimenko S.E.1,2, Shandala N.K.1,
Semenova M.P.1, Ryzhkin S.A.2, Ermolina E.P.2 , Akopova N.A.2
1A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia
2Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: Okhrimenko Sergey Evgenevich: : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Background: The widespread use of radiation technologies in medicine puts some new issues on the agenda in the field of radiation safety and protection of the personnel. This primarily relates to the advanced methods of diagnosis and treatment with the use of X-ray technology and radiopharmaceuticals (RPhP) under conditions of occupational exposure to low-intensity scattered radiation. The applied personal protective equipment reliably assures that the effective dose is not exceeded, but does not ensure compliance with the standards for the lens of the eye and the irradiated areas of the skin.
Purpose: This study is to evaluate, in the advanced medical technologies, the doses to the lens of the eye and skin of the personnel working in a low-intensity radiation field and in direct contact with radioactive sources.
Materials and methods: To evaluate the doses, TLD detectors were used for the purpose of dose assessment to the lens of the eye НР(3) and the skin of the fingers НР(0,07). The data of international studies are involved.
Results: In conditions of a significant reduction in the limits of equivalent doses to the lens of the eye, up to 20 mSv the assessment of the radiationlevels of the latter, based on data on the effective dose, becomes impossible. In addition, there are facts of damage to the lens of the eye at much lower levels of radiation than previously thought. The paper evaluates the existing exposure to the lens of the eye for some medical technologies, both according to the published data and according to the results of our own research. It is shown that the existing radiation levels can significantly exceed 20 mSv per year (up to 0.2 mSv per operation) and it is impossible to exclude the stochastic nature of lens damage. Data on the levels of skin irradiation in X-ray surgical technologies and when using RPhP based on 18F (up to 200 mSv per year for finger biting) are also provided.). New approaches to rationing activities with radiation sources are considered based on the assessment of the workload: the number of manipulations, the activity used.
Conclusion: The research data confirm the relevance of the problem of exposure to the lens of the eye and the skin of the personnel working in the field of scattered radiation of low intensity. Along with the assessment of the equivalent doses to these organs, epidemiological studies should be conducted for the purpose ofassessment and development of adequate radiation protection measures for the lens of the eye and the irradiated parts of the skin (hands)
Keywords: lens of the eye, skin, effective dose, equivalent dose, 18F, X-ray radiation, cataract, personnel
For citation: Okhrimenko SE, Korenkov IP, Shandala NK, Semenova MP, Ryzhkin SA, Ermolina EP, Akopova NA. Dose Assessment to the Lens of the Eye and Skin of the Personnel in Advanced Medical Technologies // Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(1):39-44.
DOI: 10.12737/1024-6177-2022-67-1-54-59
References
1. Balonov M.I., Golikov V.YU., Vodovatov A.V., CHipiga L.A., Zvonova I.A.., Kalnitskiy S.I., et al. Nauchnyye Osnovy Radiatsionnoy Zashchity v Sovremennoy Meditsine. T.1. Luchevaya Diagnostika = Scientific Bases of Radiation Protection in Modern Medicine. V.1. Radiation Diagnostics. Ed. Balonova M.I. St. Petersburg, NIIRG Im. prof. P. V. Ramzayeva Publ., 2019. 320 p. (In Russ.).
2. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Annals of the ICRP. 2007;37:1–332.
3. Doshchenko V.N., Buldakov L.A. Medical Consequences of Man-Made Radiation Exposure. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Мedical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2003;48;4:38-44 (In Russ.).
4. Khazagerov S.M., Shayakhmetova A.A., Arefyeva D.V., Ivanova T.A. Justification of the Procedure for Monitoring Individual Equivalent Doses in the Lens of the Eye from Photon Radiation in Production Conditions at Nuclear Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Enterprises. Sovremennyye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya = Modern Problems of Science and Education. Surgery. 2015;2;3. URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=23817 (In Russ.).
5. Azizova T.A., Bragin E.V., Khamada N., Bannikova M.V. Risk Assessment of Senile Cataract Incidence in a Cohort of Nuclear Workers of Mayak Production Association. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018;63;4:15–21. DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83b0430902e8.35861647 (In Russ.).
6. Azizova T.V., Khamada N., Grigoryeva Ye.S., Bragin Ye.V. Risk of Various Types of Cataracts in the Cohort of Workers Exposed to Occupational Chronic Radiation. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2020;65;4:48–57. DOI: 10.12737/1024-6177-2020-65-4-48-57 (In Russ.).
7. Mikryukova L.D., Krestinina L.Yu., Yepifanova S.B. A Study of Layered Lens Change in the Process of Cataract Formation in Persons Exposed to Radiation as a Result of Radiation Accidents in the Southern Urals. Radiatsionnaya Gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2018;11;4: 51-63. DOI: 10.21514/1998-426Х-2018-11-4-51-63 (In Russ.).
8. David E.F., Andrew K., Christopher O., Sungchan S., and Sanjog P. The Risk of Radiation Exposure to the Eyes of the Interventional Pain. Physician Radiology Research and Practice. 2011;2011:609537. doi:10.1155/2011/609537.
9. Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources. International Basic Safety Standards. IAEA. 2011. 329 p.
10. Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards No. GSR Part 3. Vienna, IAEA, 2015.
11. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Annals of the ICRP. 2007;37:1–332.
12. Statement on Tissue Reactions. ICRP, ref.4825-3093-1464. 2011. 12 p.
13. Implications for Occupational Radiation Protection of the New Dose Limit for the Lens of the Eye: Interim Guidance for Use and Comment. Draft 1. ICRP, 2013. 110 p.
14. Statement on Tissue Reactions and Early and Late Effects of Radiation in Normal Tissues and Organs – Threshold Doses for Tissue Reactions in a Radiation Protection Context. Publication 118. ICRP.
15. Summary of Low-Dose Radiation Effects on Health. Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR 2010). 2011. P. 51-64.
16. Ivanov S.I., Loginova S.V., Akopova N.A., Okhrimenko S.E., Nurlybaev K.N. Problems of Dosimetry of the Eye Lens. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Мedical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2014;59;4:67–72 (In Russ.).
17. Kaydanovskiy G.N., Shleyenkova Ye.N. On Problems of the Lens of the Eye Radiation Dose Monitoring. Radiatsionnaya Gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2016;9;3:75–80. DOI: 10.21514/1998-426Х-2016-9-3-75-80 (In Russ.).
18. Shleyenkova Ye.N., Golikov V.Yu., Kaydanovskiy G.N., Bazhin S.Yu., Ilin V.A. Results of Eye Lens Doses Control of Medical Personnel in St. Petersburg. Radiatsionnaya Gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2019;12;4: 29-36. DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2019-12-4-29-36 (In Russ.).
19. ORAMED: Optimization of Radiation Protection of Medical Staff. EURADOS Report 2012-02, Braunschweig, 2012.
20. Vanhavere F., Carinou E., Domienik J., Donadille L., Ginjaume M., Gualdrini G., et al. Measurements of Eye Lens Doses in Interventional Radiology and Cardiology: Final Results of the ORAMED Project. Radiation Measurements. 2011;46;11:1243-1247. DOI: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2011.08.013.
21. European Commission 2014 Council Directive 2013/59/ Euratom of 5 December 2013 Laying Down Basic Safety Standards for Protection Against the Dangers Arising from Exposure to Ionising Radiation, and Repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/ Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom 13 1–73.
22. Kuzin V.I. Angiography: Radiation-Hygienic Characteristics of the Personnel Working Conditions. Radiatsionnaya Gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2009;2;1:52-58 (In Russ.).
23. Ryzhkin S.A., Slesareva A.N., Galeyeva G.Z., Ivanov S.I. Clinical Examination of the Eyes Functional Status and Assessment of Equivalent Dose to Eye Lens in Medical Staff Performing Endovascular Interventions under X-ray Guidance. Radiatsiya i risk = Radiation and Risks. 2017;26;3:90-99. DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2017-26-3-90-99 (In Russ.).
24. Karpov N.A., Okhrimenko S.YE., Ivanov S.I., Kiryukhin O.V., Akopova N.A., Loginova S.V., Afinogenov A.M. Doza v Khrustalike Glaza: Blizhayshiye Perspektivy = Dose in the Lens of the Eye: Immediate Prospects. Sbornik mat. Vserossiyskoy Konferentsii s Mezhdunarodnym Uchastiyem, Posvyashchennoy 85-Letiyu so Dnya Rozhdeniya V. A. Kukhtina. = Collection of Mat. All-Russian Conference with International Participation Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of the Birth V.A. Kuhtina Cheboksary April 3-4, 2014. Cheboksary Publ., 2014. P. 235-236 (In Russ.).
25. Okhrimenko S.E., Korenkov I.P., Prokhorov N.I., Shandala N.K., Zakharova A.V. Radiation-Hygienic Assessment of Modern Medical Technologies. Gigiyena i Sanitariya = Hygiene and Sanitation 2020;99;9:939-946. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2020-99-9-939-946 (In Russ.).
26. Malgorzata Wrzesień. 18F-FDG Production Procedures as a Source of Eye Lens Exposure to Radiation. J. Radiol. Prot. 2018;38;1:382–393. https://doi.org/10.1088 /1361-6498/aaa287.
27. Malgorzata Wrzesień. The Effect of Work System on the Hand Exposure of Workers in 18F-FDG Production Centers. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 2018;41:541-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-018-0644-9.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 17.07.2021.
Accepted for publication: 05.09.2021
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 1
Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) in Patients
with Head and Neck Cancer Treatment.
Current State of the Problem
A.R. Gevorkov, A.V. Boyko, A.D. Kaprin
P.A. Hertsen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: Gevorkov Artur Rubenovich: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
This publication provides an overview of the current state of the art in the use of stereotactic radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with head and neck tumors. We have analyzed current trends, and also presented the features of radiobiology and the basic principles of radiation treatment. Special attention is paid to indications for SBRT, fractionation schemes and radiation planning. The use of SBRT for primary head and neck tumors, including boost, as well as relapses treatment are described. The results of the implementation of SBRT by various authors both as an independent option and in combination with drug therapy are presented. The efficacy and tolerance of radiation is described in a summary form with clarifying comments. The radiation therapy toxicity profile is detailed, including the main risk factors of postradiation complications.
Keywords: head – neck cancer, stereotactic body radion therapy, SBRT
For citation: Gevorkov AR, Boyko AV, Kaprin AD. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Treatment. Current State of the Problem. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(1):65-76.
DOI: 10.12737/1024-6177-2022-67-1-65-76
References
1. Bray F. International Agency for Research on Cancer, American Cancer Society, et all. Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide. CA CANCER J. CLIN. 2018;68:394-424.
2. Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration. Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived with Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5;12:1749–1768. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2996.
3. Kaprin A.D., Starinskiy V.V., Petrova G.V. Sostoyaniye Onkologicheskoy Pomoshchi Naseleniyu Rossii v 2018 Godu = The State of Cancer Care for the Population of Russia in 2018. Moscow, MNIOI im. N. I. Gertsena Publ., 2019. 236 p. (In Russ.). [Каприн А.Д., Старинский В.В., Г. В. Петрова. Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2018 году. М.: МНИОИ им. Н. И. Герцена, 2019. 236 с.].
4. Shah J.P., Patel S.G., Singh B., Wong R. Jatin Shah’s Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Fifth Edition. Elsevier, 2020. 859 p.
5. Lee W.T., Esclamado R.M. Salvage Surgery after Chemoradiation Therapy. In: Adelstein DJ, Editor. Squamous Cell Head and Neck Cancer: Recent Clinical Progress and Prospects for the Future. Totowa, NJ, Humana Press, 2005. P. 69–78.
6. Ed. Maghami E., Allen S. Multidisciplinary Care of the Head and Neck Cancer Patient. Springer, 2018. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-65421-8.
7. Ed. Hoskin P. Radiotherapy in Practice: External Beam Therapy. Oxford University Press, 2019. 545 p.
8. Hansen E.K., Roach M. Handbook of Evidence-Based Radiation Oncology. Springer International Publishing AG, 2018. 937 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-62642-0.
9. Pignon J.P., Maitre A.L., Maillard E., Bourhis J. On Behalf of the MACH-NC Collaborative Group. Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer (MACH-NC): an Update on 93 Randomised Trials and 17,346 Patients. Radiother. Oncol. 2009;92;1:4-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2009.04.014.
10. Huncharek M., et al. Combined Chemoradiation Versus Radiation Therapy Alone in Locally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Results of a Meta-Analysis of 1,528 Patients from Six Randomized Trials. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002;25;3:219–223.
11. Rades D., Seidl D., Janssen S., et al. Comparison of Weekly Administration of Cisplatin Versus three Courses of Cisplatin 100 mg/m2 for Definitive Radiochemotherapy of Locally Advanced Head-and-Neck Cancers. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:437.
12. Bonner J.A., Harari P.M., Giralt J. Radiotherapy Plus Cetuximab for Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006;354:567.
13. Overgaard J., Mohanti B.K., Begum N., et al. Five Versus Six Fractions of Radiotherapy Per Week for Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (IAEA-ACC study): a Randomised, Multicentre Trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:553–560.
14. Ed. Edward C. Halperin, Carlos A. Perez, Luther W. Brady. Perez and Brady's Principles and Practice of Radiation Oncology. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2013.
15. Karam I., Yao M., Heron D.E., Poon I., Koyfman S.A., Yom S..S, et al. Survey of Current Practices from the International Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Consortium (ISBRTC) for Head and Neck Cancers. Future Oncol. 2017;13;7:603–613.
16. Baliga S., Kabarriti R., Ohri N., Haynes-Lewis H., Yaparpalvi R., Kalnicki S., et al. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: a Critical Review. Head Neck. 2017;39;3:595–601.
17. Karam I., Poon I., Lee J., Liu S., Higgins K., Enepekides D., et al. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer: an Addition to the Armamentarium Against Head and Neck Cancer. Future Oncol. 2015;11;21:2937–2947.
18. Guerrero M., Li X.A. Extending the Linear-Quadratic Model for Large Fraction Doses Pertinent to Stereotactic Radiotherapy. Phys. Med. Biol. 2004;49;20:4825–4835.
19. Hanin L.G., Zaider M. Cell-Survival Probability at Large Doses: an Alternative to the Linear-Quadratic Model. Phys. Med. Biol. 2010;55;16:4687–4702.
20. Brown J.M., Carlson D.J., Brenner D.J. The Tumor Radiobiology of SRS and SBRT: are more than the 5 Rs Involved? Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2014;88;2:254–262.
21. Brown J.M., Carlson D.J., Brenner D.J. Dose Escalation, not “New Biology,” Can Account for the Efficacy of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. In Reply to Rao, et al. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2014;89;3:693–694. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.03.014.
22. Kirkpatrick J.P., Brenner D.J., Orton C.G. Point/Counterpoint. The Linear-Quadratic Model is Inappropriate to Model High Dose Per Fraction Effects in Radiosurgery. Med. Phys. 2009;36;8:3381–3384.
23. Wang J.Z., Huang Z., Lo S.S., Yuh W.T., Mayr N.A. A Generalized Linear-Quadratic Model for Radiosurgery, Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy, and High-Dose Rate Brachytherapy. Sci. Transl. Med. 2010;2:39ra48. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3000864.
24. Hoffmann A.L., Nahum A.E. Fractionation in Normal Tissues: the (α/β)eff Concept Can Account for Dose Heterogeneity and Volume Effects. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2013;58;19:6897-6914.
25. Song C.W., Terezakis S., et al. Indirect Cell Death and the LQ Model in SBRT and SRS. Jour. of Radiosurgery and SBRT. 2020;7:1-4.
25.1. McMahon S.J. The Linear Quadratic Model: Usage, Interpretation and Challenges. Phys. Med. Biol. 2019;64;1:01TR01. doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aaf26a.
26. Deloch L., Derer A., Hartmann J., Frey B., Fietkau R., Gaipl U.S. Modern Radiotherapy Concepts and the Impact of Radiation on Immune Activation. Front. Oncol. 2016;6:141. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2016.00141.
27. Ed. Orit Kaidar-Person, Ronald Chen. Hypofractionated and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy. A Practical Guide. Springer, Cham, 2018. 406 p. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92802-9.
28. Ed. Heron D.E., Huq M., Saiful M.S., Herman J.M. Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT). Springer, Cham, 2019. 435 p.
28.1. Ed. Mark Trombetta, Jean-Philippe Pignol, Paolo Montemaggi, Luther W. Brady. Alternate Fractionation in Radiotherapy Paradigm Change. Springer, Cham, 2018. 413 p. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51198-6.
29. Ed. Sethi R.A., et al. Handbook of Evidence-Based Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. Springer, Cham, 2016. 245 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-21897-7.
30. Vargo J.A., Ward M.C., Caudell J.J., Riaz N., Dunlap N.E., Isrow D., et al. A Multi-Institutional Comparison of SBRT and IMRT for Definitive Reirradiation of Recurrent or Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2018;100;3:595–605.
31. Yamazaki H., Ogita M., Himei K., Nakamura S., Yoshida K., Kotsuma T., et al. Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy Using CyberKnife as a Boost Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer, a Multi-Institutional Survey: Impact of Planning Target Volume. Anticancer Res. 2014;34;10:5755-9.
32. Yamazaki H., Ogita M., Himei K., Nakamura S., Kotsuma T., Yoshida K., et al. Carotid Blowout Syndrome in Pharyngeal Cancer Patients Treated by Hypofractionated Stereotactic Re-Irradiation Using CyberKnife: a Multi-Institutional Matched-Cohort Analysis. Radiother Oncol. 2015;115;1:67–71.
33. Syrigos K.N., Karachalios D., Karapanagiotou E.M., Nutting C.M., Manolopoulos L., Harrington K.J. Head and Neck Cancer in the Elderly: an Overview on the Treatment Modalities. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35;3:237–245.
34. Huang S.H., O’Sullivan B., Waldron J., Lockwood G., Bayley A., Kim J., et al. Patterns of Care in Elderly Head-and-Neck Cancer Radiation Oncology Patients: a Single-Center Cohort Study. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011;79;1:46–51.
35. Monnier L., Touboul E., Durdux C., Lang P., St Guily J.L., Huguet F. Hypofractionated Palliative Radiotherapy for Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: the IHF2SQ Regimen. Head Neck. 2013;35;12:1683–1688.
36. Bonomo P., Desideri I., Loi M., Lo Russo M., Olmetto E., Maragna V., et al. Elderly Patients Affected by Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Unfit for Standard Curative Treatment: is De-Intensified, Hypofractionated Radiotherapy a Feasible Strategy? Oral Oncol. 2017;74:142–7.
37. Corry J., Peters L.J., Costa I.D., Milner A.D., Fawns H., Rischin D., et al. The ‘QUAD SHOT’—a Phase II Study of Palliative Radiotherapy for Incurable Head and Neck Cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2005;77;2:137–142.
38. Teckie S., Lok B.H., Rao S., Gutiontov S.I., Yamada Y., Berry S.L., et al. High-Dose Hypofractionated Radiotherapy is Effective and Safe for Tumors in the Head-and-Neck. Oral Oncol. 2016;60:74–80.
39. Siddiqui F., Patel M., Khan M., McLean S., Dragovic J., Jin J., et al. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Primary, Recurrent, and Metastatic Tumors in the Head-and-Neck Region. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol Biol. Phys. 2009;74;4:1047–1053.
40. Kodani N., Yamazaki H., Tsubokura T., Shiomi H., Kobayashi K., Nishimura T., et al. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Tumor: Disease Control and Morbidity Outcomes. J. Radiat. Res. 2011;52;1:24–31.
41. Kawaguchi K., Sato K., Yamada H., Horie A., Nomura T., Iketani S., et al. Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Combination with Chemotherapy as Primary Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2012;70;2:461–472.
42. Vargo J.A., Ferris R.L., Clump D.A., Heron D.E. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy as Primary Treatment for Elderly Patients with Medically Inoperable Head and Neck Cancer. Front Oncol. 2014;4:214.
43. Khan L., Tjong M., Raziee H., Lee J., Erler D., Chin L., et al. Role of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Symptom Control in Head and Neck Cancer Patients. Support Care Cancer. 2015;23;4:1099.
44. Kang B.-H., Yu T., Kim J.H., Park J.M., Kim J.-I., Chung E.-J., et al. Early Closure of a Phase 1 Clinical Trial for SABR in Early-Stage Glottic Cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2019;105:104–109.
45. Sher D.J., Timmerman R.D., Nedzi L., Ding C., Pham N.-L., Zhao B., et al. Phase 1 Fractional Dose-Escalation Study of Equipotent Stereotactic Radiation Therapy Regimens for Early-Stage Glottic Larynx Cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2019;105:110–118.
46. Chen H.H.W., Tsai S., Wang M., Wu. Y., Hsueh W., Yang M., et al. Experience in Fractionated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Newly Diagnosed Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2006;66;5:1408–1414.
47. Hara W., Loo B.W., Goffinet D.R., Chang S.D., Adler J.R., Pinto H.A., et al. Excellent Local Control with Stereotactic Radiotherapy Boost after External Beam Radiotherapy in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2008;71;2:393–400.
48. Al-Mamgani A., Tans L., Teguh D.N., van Rooij P., Zwijnenburg E.M., Levendag P.C. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: A Promising Treatment Option for The Boost of Oropharyngeal Cancers not Suitable for Brachytherapy: A Single-Institutional Experience. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2012;82;4:1494–1500.
49. Lee D.S., Kim Y.S., Cheon J.S., Song J.H., Son S.H., Jang J.S., et al. Long-Term Outcome and Toxicity of Hypofractionated Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy as a Boost Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer: The Importance of Boost Volume Assessment. Radiat. Oncol. 2012;7;1:85.
50. Ghaly M., Halthore A., Antone J., Zhang H., Cohen J., Sachs H., et al. Dose-Escalated Stereotactic Radiosurgery (Srs) Boost for Unfavorable Locally Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer: Phase I/II Trial. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2014;90;1:S122.
51. Yau T.K., Sze W.M., Lee W.M., Yeung M.W., Leung K.C., et al. Effectiveness of Brachytherapy and Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy Boost for Persistent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Head Neck. 2004;26:1024–1030.
52. Wu S.X., Chua D.T., Deng M.L., Zhao C., Li F.Y., et al. Outcome of Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy for 90 Patients with Locally Persistent and Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2007;69:761–769.
53. Patel P.R., Salama J.K. Reirradiation for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer. Expert Rev. Anticancer Ther. 2012;12;9:1177–1189.
54. Goodwin W.J.Jr. Salvage Surgery for Patients with Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Upper Aerodigestive Tract: When Do the Ends Justify the Means? Laryngoscope. 2000;110;(3 II):1–18.
55. McDonald M.W., Lawson J., Garg M.K., Quon H., Ridge J.A., Saba N., et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Retreatment of Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer after Prior Definitive Radiation: Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology-Head and Neck Cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011;80;5:1292–1298.
56. Tortochaux J., Tao Y., Tournay E., Lapeyre M., Lesaunier F., Bardet E., et al. Randomized Phase III Trial (GORTEC 98-03) Comparing Re-Irradiation Plus Chemotherapy Versus Methotrexate In Patients With Recurrent or a Second Primary Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Treated with a Palliative Intent. Radiother Oncol. 2011;100;1:70–75.
57. Lartigau E.F., Tresch E., Thariat J., Graff P., Coche-Dequeant B., Benezery K., et al. Multi Institutional Phase II Study of Concomitant Stereotactic Reirradiation and Cetuximab for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer. Radiother. Oncol. 2013;109;2:281–285.
58. Langer C.J., Harris J., Horwitz E.M., Nicolaou N., Kies M., Curran W., et al. Phase II Study of Low-Dose Paclitaxel and Cisplatin in Combination with Split-Course Concomitant Twice-Daily Reirradiation in Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 9911. J. Clin. Oncol. 2007;25;30:4800–4805.
59. Voynov G., Heron D.E., Burton S., Grandis J., Quinn A., Ferris R., et al. Frameless Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Recurrent Head and Neck Carcinoma. Technol. Cancer Res. Treat. 2006;5;5:529–535.
60. Heron D.E., Ferris R.L., Karamouzis M., Andrade R.S., Deeb E.L., Burton S., et al. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Results of a Phase I Dose-Escalation Trial. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2009;75;5:1493–1500.
61. Spencer S.A., Harris J., Wheeler R.H., Machtay M., Schultz C., Spanos W., et al. Final Report of RTOG 9610, a Multi-Institutional Trial of Reirradiation and Chemotherapy for Unresectable Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. Head Neck. 2008;30;3:281–288.
62. Rwigema J.C.M., Heron D.E., Ferris R.L., Andrade R.S., Gibson M.K., Yang Y., et al. The Impact of Tumor Volume and Radiotherapy Dose on Outcome in Previously Irradiated Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Treated with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011;34;4:372–379.
63. Vargo J.A., Ferris R.L., Ohr J., Clump D.A., Davis K.S., Duvvuri U., et al. A Prospective Phase 2 Trial of Reirradiation with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Plus Cetuximab in Patients with Previously Irradiated Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2015;91;3:480–488.
64. Unger K.R., Lominska C.E., Deeken J.F., Davidson B.J., Newkirk K.A., Gagnon G.J., et al. Fractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Reirradiation of Head-and-Neck Cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2010;77;5:1411–1419.
65. Cengiz M., Цzyiğit G., Yazici G., Doğan A., Yildiz F., Zorlu F., et al. Salvage Reirradiation with Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Locally Recurrent Head-and-Neck Tumors. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011;81;1:104–109.
66. Gebhardt B.J., Vargo J.A., Ling D., Jones B., Mohney M., Clump D.A., et al. Carotid Dosimetry and the Risk of Carotid Blowout Syndrome Following Re-Irradiation with Head and Neck Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2018;101;1:195–200.
67. Kong L., Hu J., Guan X., Gao J., Lu R., Lu J.J. Phase I/II Trial Evaluating Carbon Ion Radiotherapy for Salvaging Treatment of Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. J. Cancer. 2016;7;7:774–783.
68. Romesser P.B., Cahlon O., Scher E.D., Hug E.B., Sine K., Deselm C., et al. Proton Beam Reirradiation for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Multi-Institutional Report on Feasibility and Early Outcomes. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2016;95;1:386–395.
69. McDonald M.W., Zolali-Meybodi O., Lehnert S.J., Estabrook N.C., Liu Y., Cohen-Gadol A.A., et al. Reirradiation of Recurrent and Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer with Proton Therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2016;96;4:808–819.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 17.07.2021.
Accepted for publication: 05.09.2021