Issues journals
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026. Vol. 71. № 4
DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-5-11
A.K. Chigasova1, 2, 3, A.N. Osipov1, 2
ANALYSIS OF PHOSPHORYLATED HISTONE H2AX FOCI IN RADIOBIOLOGY: A LITERATURE REVIEW
1 A.I. Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia
2 N.N. Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Moscow, Russia
3 N.M. Emanuel Institute of Biochemical Physics, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: A.N. Osipov, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
CONTENTS
Introduction
General characteristics of histone H2AX
Sources of spontaneous (background) γH2AX foci
Formation of γH2AX foci in irradiated cells
The influence of chromatin structure on the formation and degradation of radiation-induced γH2AX foci
The influence of cell cycle phase on the formation and degradation of radiation-induced γH2AX foci
Residual radiation-induced γH2AX foci
Conclusion
Keywords: γH2AX, DNA damage, DNA repair, ionizing radiation
For citation: Chigasova AK, Osipov AN. Analysis of Phosphorylated Histone H2ax Foci in Radiobiology: a Literature Review. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026;71(4):5–11. DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-5-11
References
1. Ahnstrom G, Erixon K. Radiation Induced Strand Breakage in DNA from Mammalian Cells. Strand Separation in Alkaline Solution. International Journal of Radiation Biology and Related Studies in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine. 1973;23;3:285-9.
2. Blocher D. DNA Double Strand Breaks in Ehrlich Ascites Tumour Cells at Low Doses of X-Rays. I. Determination of Induced Breaks by Centrifugation at Reduced Speed. International Journal of Radiation Biology and Related Studies in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine. 1982;42;3:317-28.
3. Schwartz D.C., Cantor C.R. Separation of Yeast Chromosome-Sized DNAs by Pulsed Field Gradient Gel Electrophoresis. Cell. 1984;37;1:67-75.
4. Osipov A., Arkhangelskaya E., Vinokurov A., Smetaninа N., Zhavoronkov A., Klokov D. DNA Comet Giemsa Staining for Conventional Bright-Field Microscopy. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2014;15;4:6086-95. Doi: 10.3390/ijms15046086.
5. Bushmanov A., Vorobyeva N., Molodtsova D., Osipov A.N. Utilization of DNA Double-Strand Breaks for Biodosimetry of Ionizing Radiation Exposure. Environmental Advances. 2022;8:100207. Doi: 10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100207.
6. Lobrich M., Shibata A., Beucher A., Fisher A., Ensminger M., Goodarzi A.A., et al. Gamma-H2AX Foci Analysis for Monitoring DNA Double-Strand Break Repair: Strengths, Limitations and Optimization. Cell Cycle. 2010;9;4:662-9. Doi: 10.4161/cc.9.4.10764.
7. Rogakou E.P., Pilch D.R., Orr A.H., Ivanova V.S., Bonner W.M. DNA Double-Stranded Breaks Induce Histone H2AX Phosphorylation on Serine 139. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1998;273;10:5858-68.
8. Pantazis P., Bonner W.M. Quantitative Determination of Histone Modification. H2A Acetylation and Phosphorylation. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1981;256;9:4669-75.
9. Ikura T., Tashiro S., Kakino A., Shima H., Jacob N., Amunugama R., et al. DNA Damage-Dependent Acetylation and Ubiquitination of H2AX Enhances Chromatin Dynamics. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2007;27;20:7028-40. Doi: 10.1128/MCB.00579-07.
10. Chew Y.C., Camporeale G., Kothapalli N., Sarath G., Zempleni J. Lysine Residues in N-Terminal and C-Terminal Regions of Human Histone H2A are Targets for Biotinylation by Biotinidase. The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry. 2006;17;4:225-33. Doi: 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2005.05.003.
11. Xiao A., Li H., Shechter D., Ahn S.H., Fabrizio L.A., Erdjument-Bromage H., et al. WSTF Regulates the H2A.X DNA Damage Response Via a Novel Tyrosine Kinase Activity. Nature. 2009;457;7225:57-62. Doi: 10.1038/nature07668.
12. Pinto D.M., Flaus A. Structure and Function of Histone H2AX. Sub-Cellular Biochemistry. 2010;50:55-78. Doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-3471-7_4.
13. Rothkamm K., Lobrich M. Evidence for a Lack of DNA Double-Strand Break Repair in Human Cells Exposed to Very Low X-Ray Doses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100;9:5057-62. Doi: 10.1073/pnas.0830918100.
14. Rogakou E.P., Boon C., Redon C., Bonner W.M. Megabase Chromatin Domains Involved in DNA Double-Strand Breaks in Vivo. The Journal of Cell Biology. 1999;146;5:905-16.
15. MacPhail S.H., Banath J.P., Yu Y., Chu E., Olive P.L. Cell Cycle-Dependent Expression of Phosphorylated Histone H2AX: Reduced Expression in Unirradiated but not X-Irradiated G1-Phase Cells. Radiation Research. 2003;159;6:759-67.
16. Bonner W.M., Redon C.E., Dickey J.S., Nakamura A.J., Sedelnikova O.A., Solier S., et al. Gamma-H2AX and Cancer. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2008;8;12:957-67. Doi: 10.1038/nrc2523.
17. Wilson P.F., Nham P.B., Urbin S.S., Hinz J.M., Jones I.M., Thompson L.H. Inter-Individual Variation in DNA Double-Strand Break Repair in Human Fibroblasts Before and after Exposure to Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation. Mutation Research. 2010;683;1-2:91-7. Doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2009.10.013.
18. Nakamura A.J., Chiang Y.J., Hathcock K.S., Horikawa I., Sedelnikova O.A., Hodes R.J., et al. Both Telomeric and Non-Telomeric DNA Damage are Determinants of Mammalian Cellular Senescence. Epigenetics & Chromatin. 2008;1;1:6. Doi: 10.1186/1756-8935-1-6.
19. Herbig U., Ferreira M., Condel L., Carey D., Sedivy J.M. Cellular Senescence in Aging Primates. Science. 2006;311;5765:1257. Doi: 10.1126/science.1122446.
20. Nakamura A.J., Redon C.E., Bonner W.M., Sedelnikova O.A. Telomere-Dependent and Telomere-Independent Origins of Endogenous DNA Damage in Tumor Cells. Aging. 2009;1;2:212-8. Doi: 10.18632/aging.100019.
21. Markova E., Schultz N., Belyaev I.Y. Kinetics and Dose-Response of Residual 53BP1/gamma-H2AX foci: Co-Localization, Relationship with DSB Repair and Clonogenic Survival. International Journal of Radiation Biology. 2007;83;5:319-29. Doi: 10.1080/09553000601170469.
22. Costes S.V., Boissiere A., Ravani S., Romano R., Parvin B., Barcellos-Hoff MH. Imaging Features that Discriminate between Foci Induced by High- and Low-LET Radiation in Human Fibroblasts. Radiation Research. 2006;165;5:505-15. Doi: 10.1667/RR3538.1.
23. McManus K.J., Hendzel M.J. ATM-Dependent DNA Damage-Independent Mitotic Phosphorylation of H2AX in Normally Growing Mammalian Cells. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2005;16;10:5013-25. Doi: 10.1091/mbc.E05-01-0065.
24. Asaithamby A., Chen D.J. Cellular Responses to DNA Double-Strand Breaks after Low-Dose Gamma-Irradiation. Nucleic Acids Research. 2009;37;12:3912-23. Doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp237.
25. Mahrhofer H., Burger S., Oppitz U., Flentje M., Djuzenova C.S. Radiation Induced DNA Damage and Damage Repair in Human Tumor and Fibroblast Cell Lines Assessed by Histone H2AX Phosphorylation. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2006;64;2:573-80. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.037.
26. Schollnberger H., Mitchel R.E., Crawford-Brown D.J., Hofmann W. Nonlinear Dose-Response Relationships and Inducible Cellular Defence Mechanisms. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2002;22;3A:A21-5.
27. Kotenko K.V., Bushmanov A.Y., Ozerov I.V., Guryev D.V., Anchishkina N.A., Smetanina N.M., et al. Changes in the Number of Double-Strand DNA Breaks in Chinese Hamster V79 Cells Exposed to Gamma-Radiation with Different Dose Rates. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2013;14;7:13719-26. Doi: 10.3390/ijms140713719.
28. Neumaier T., Swenson J., Pham C., Polyzos A., Lo A.T., Yang P., et al. Evidence for Formation of DNA Repair Centers and Dose-Response Nonlinearity in Human Cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012;109;2:443-8. Doi: 10.1073/pnas.1117849108.
29. Masuda Y., Kamiya K. Molecular Nature of Radiation Injury and DNA Repair Disorders Associated with Radiosensitivity. International Journal of Hematology. 2012;95;3:239-45. Doi: 10.1007/s12185-012-1008-y.
30. Durocher D., Jackson S.P. DNA-PK, ATM and ATR as Sensors of DNA Damage: Variations on a Theme? Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 2001;13;2:225-31.
31. Paull T.T., Rogakou E.P., Yamazaki V., Kirchgessner C.U., Gellert M., Bonner W.M. A Critical Role for Histone H2AX in Recruitment of Repair Factors to Nuclear Foci after DNA Damage. Current Biology. 2000;10;15:886-95.
32. Burma S., Chen B.P., Murphy M., Kurimasa A., Chen D.J. ATM Phosphorylates Histone H2AX in Response to DNA Double-Strand Breaks. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2001;276;45:42462-7. Doi: 10.1074/jbc.C100466200.
33. Stucki M., Jackson S.P. Gamma-H2AX and MDC1: Anchoring the DNA-Damage-Response Machinery to Broken Chromosomes. DNA Repair. 2006;5;5:534-43. Doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2006.01.012.
34. Peng Y., Woods R.G., Beamish H., Ye R., Lees-Miller S.P., Lavin M.F., et al. Deficiency in the Catalytic Subunit of DNA-Dependent Protein Kinase Causes Down-Regulation of ATM. Cancer Research. 2005;65;5:1670-7. Doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-3451.
35. Shrivastav M., Miller C.A., De Haro L.P., Durant S.T., Chen B.P., Chen D.J., et al. DNA-PKcs and ATM Co-Regulate DNA Double-Strand Break Repair. DNA Repair. 2009;8;8:920-9. Doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2009.05.006.
36. An J., Huang Y.C., Xu Q.Z., Zhou L.J., Shang Z.F., Huang B., et al. DNA-PKcs Plays a Dominant Role in the Regulation of H2AX Phosphorylation in Response to DNA Damage and Cell Cycle Progression. BMC Molecular Biology. 2010;11:18. Doi: 10.1186/1471-2199-11-18.
37. Flassig R.J., Maubach G., Tager C., Sundmacher K., Naumann M. Experimental Design, Validation and Computational Modeling Uncover DNA Damage Sensing by DNA-PK and ATM. Molecular Biosystems. 2014;10;7:1978-86. Doi: 10.1039/c4mb00093e.
38. Ward I.M., Chen J. Histone H2AX is Phosphorylated in an ATR-Dependent Manner in Response to Replicational Stress. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2001;276;51:47759-62. Doi: 10.1074/jbc.C100569200.
39. Blackford A.N., Jackson S.P. ATM, ATR, and DNA-PK: The Trinity at the Heart of the DNA Damage Response. Molecular Cell. 2017;66;6:801-17. Doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.05.015.
40. Abramenkovs A., Stenerlow B. Measurement of DNA-Dependent Protein Kinase Phosphorylation Using Flow Cytometry Provides a Reliable Estimate of DNA Repair Capacity. Radiation research. 2017;188;6:597-604. Doi: 10.1667/RR14693.1.
41. Suzuki K., Okada H., Yamauchi M., Oka Y., Kodama S., Watanabe M. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Phosphorylated ATM Foci Induced by Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation. Radiat Res. 2006;165;5:499-504. Doi: 10.1667/RR3542.1.
42. Bakkenist C.J., Kastan M.B. DNA Damage Activates ATM through Intermolecular Autophosphorylation and Dimer Dissociation. Nature. 2003;421;6922:499-506. Doi: 10.1038/nature01368.
43. Kitagawa R., Kastan M.B. The ATM-Dependent DNA Damage Signaling Pathway. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology. 2005;70:99-109. Doi: 10.1101/sqb.2005.70.002.
44. Yamauchi M., Oka Y., Yamamoto M., Niimura K., Uchida M., Kodama S., et al. Growth of Persistent Foci of DNA Damage Checkpoint Factors is Essential for Amplification of G1 Checkpoint Signaling. DNA Repair. 2008;7;3:405-17. Doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2007.11.011.
45. Enns L., Rasouli-Nia A., Hendzel M., Marples B., Weinfeld M. Association of ATM Activation and DNA Repair with Induced Radioresistance after Low-Dose Irradiation. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2015;166;1-4:131-6. Doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncv203.
46. Goodarzi A.A., Noon A.T., Deckbar D., Ziv Y., Shiloh Y., Lobrich M., et al. ATM Signaling Facilitates Repair of DNA Double-Strand Breaks Associated with Heterochromatin. Molecular Cell. 2008;31;2:167-77. Doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.05.017.
47. Kim J.A., Kruhlak M., Dotiwala F., Nussenzweig A., Haber J.E. Heterochromatin is Refractory to Gamma-H2AX Modification in Yeast and Mammals. The Journal of Cell Biology. 2007;178;2:209-18. Doi: 10.1083/jcb.200612031.
48. Cowell I.G., Sunter N.J., Singh P.B., Austin C.A., Durkacz B.W., Tilby M.J. Gamma-H2AX Foci form Preferentially in Euchromatin after Ionising-Radiation. PloS One. 2007;2;10:e1057. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001057.
49. Kruhlak M.J., Celeste A., Dellaire G., Fernandez-Capetillo O., Muller W.G., McNally J.G., et al. Changes in Chromatin Structure and Mobility in Living Cells at Sites of DNA Double-Strand Breaks. The Journal of Cell Biology. 2006;172;6:823-34. Doi: 10.1083/jcb.200510015.
50. Sancar A., Lindsey-Boltz L.A., Unsal-Kacmaz K., Linn S. Molecular Mechanisms of Mammalian DNA Repair and the DNA Damage Checkpoints. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 2004;73:39-85. Doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.73.011303.073723.
51. Ziv Y., Bielopolski D., Galanty Y., Lukas C., Taya Y., Schultz D.C., et al. Chromatin Relaxation in Response to DNA Double-Strand Breaks is Modulated by a Novel ATM- and KAP-1 Dependent Pathway. Nature Cell Biology. 2006;8;8:870-6. Doi: 10.1038/ncb1446.
52. Goodarzi A.A., Kurka T., Jeggo P.A. KAP-1 Phosphorylation Regulates CHD3 Nucleosome Remodeling during the DNA Double-Strand Break Response. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. 2011;18;7:831-9. Doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2077.
53. Beucher A., Birraux J., Tchouandong L., Barton O., Shibata A., Conrad S., et al. ATM and Artemis Promote Homologous Recombination of Radiation-Induced DNA Double-Strand Breaks in G2. The EMBO Journal. 2009;28;21:3413-27. Doi: 10.1038/emboj.2009.276.
54. Bee L., Fabris S., Cherubini R., Mognato M., Celotti L. The Efficiency of Homologous Recombination and Non-Homologous end Joining Systems in Repairing Double-Strand Breaks during Cell Cycle Progression. PloS One. 2013;8;7:e69061. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069061.
55. Belov O., Chigasova A., Pustovalova M., Osipov A., Eremin P., Vorobyeva N., et al. Dose-Dependent Shift in Relative Contribution of Homologous Recombination to DNA Repair after Low-LET Ionizing Radiation Exposure: Empirical Evidence and Numerical Simulation. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2023;45;9:7352-73. Doi: 10.3390/cimb45090465.
56. Osipov A., Chigasova A., Yashkina E., Ignatov M., Fedotov Y., Molodtsova D., et al. Residual Foci of DNA Damage Response Proteins in Relation to Cellular Senescence and Autophagy in X-Ray Irradiated Fibroblasts. Cells. 2023;12;8:1209. Doi: 10.3390/cells12081209.
57. Osipov A., Chigasova A., Belov O., Yashkina E., Ignatov M., Fedotov Y., et al. Dose Threshold for Residual γH2AX, 53BP1, pATM and p-p53 (Ser-15) Foci in X-ray Irradiated Human Fibroblasts. International Journal of Radiation Biology. 2025;101;3:254-63. Doi: 10.1080/09553002.2024.2445581.
58. Vaurijoux A., Voisin P., Freneau A., Barquinero J.F., Gruel G. Transmission of Persistent Ionizing Radiation-Induced foci Through Cell Division in Human Primary Cells. Mutation Research. 2017;797-799:15-25. Doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2017.03.003.
59. Minakawa Y., Atsumi Y., Shinohara A., Murakami Y., Yoshioka K. Gamma-Irradiated Quiescent Cells Repair Directly Induced Double-Strand Breaks but Accumulate Persistent Double-Strand Breaks during Subsequent DNA Replication. Genes to Cells: Devoted to Molecular & Cellular Mechanisms. 2016;21;7:789-97. Doi: 10.1111/gtc.12381.
60. Alessio N., Del Gaudio S., Capasso S., Di Bernardo G., Cappabianca S., Cipollaro M., et al. Low Dose Radiation Induced Senescence of Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells and Impaired the Autophagy Process. Oncotarget. 2015;6;10:8155-66. Doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.2692.
61. Chowdhury D., Keogh M.C., Ishii H., Peterson C.L., Buratowski S., Lieberman J. Gamma-H2AX Dephosphorylation by Protein Phosphatase 2A Facilitates DNA Double-Strand Break Repair. Molecular cell. 2005;20;5:801-9. Doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.10.003.
62. Chowdhury D., Xu X., Zhong X., Ahmed F., Zhong J., Liao J., et al. A PP4-Phosphatase Complex Dephosphorylates Gamma-H2AX Generated during DNA Replication. Molecular Cell. 2008;31;1:33-46. Doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.05.016.
63. Banath J.P., Klokov D, MacPhail SH, Banuelos CA, Olive PL. Residual Gamma-H2AX Foci as an Indication of Lethal DNA Lesions. BMC Cancer. 2010;10:4. Doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-4.
64. Sak A., Stueben G., Groneberg M., Bocker W., Stuschke M. Targeting of Rad51-Dependent Homologous Recombination: Implications for the Radiation Sensitivity of Human Lung Cancer Cell Lines. British Journal of Cancer. 2005;92;6:1089-97. Doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602457.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest.The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The research was carried out within the framework of the state task of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (No. 1024122500008-3, code FFZE-2025-0030).
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.03.2026. Accepted for publication: 25.04.2026.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026. Vol. 71. № 4
DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-12-20
V.G. Shuvatova, D.A. Shaposhnikova, K.V. Kondratyev, E.Yu. Moskaleva
RADIOSENSITIVITY OF MCF-7 HUMAN BREAST CANCER STEM CELLS CULTURED AS 2D- AND 3D-CULTURES
National Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: E.Yu. Moskaleva, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Tumor cells cultured under special conditions in 3D cultures (3DK) are characterized by higher radioresistance than cells in 2D cultures (2DK), but it is not known how the conditions of these two cultivation methods affect the radiosensitivity of cancer stem cells (СSCs). In this regard, the aim of the work was to compare human breast adenocarcinoma cells of the MCF-7 line, cultured in the form of 2DK and 3DK, according to the parameters characterizing the rate of cell proliferation, the content of CSCs and the radiosensitivity of the cells of these cultures and CSCs in their composition when exposed to γ-radiation.
Material and methods: To characterize the rate of cell proliferation in 2DK and 3DK, cell doubling time was analyzed by dynamic cell counting using light microscopy; cell cycle parameters and the proportion of proliferating cells based on the number of Ki67+ cells were assessed using flow cytometry. The content of CSCs was assessed by the proportion and number of cells with the CD44+/CD24-/low phenotype, by the size of the SP fraction and by the proportion of cells with high aldehyde dehydrogenase activity using flow cytometry. Cells were γ-irradiated using the GUT-200M system at doses of 1–8 Gy at a dose rate of 0.75 Gy/min. Cell radiosensitivity was assessed using the D0 and Dq indices.
Results: MCF-7 cells cultured as 3DK were shown to have a longer cell doubling time and slower proliferation, than 2DK cells as was assessed by cell cycle parameters and the proportion of Ki67+ cells. Culturing cells as 3DK resulted in a 10-fold increase in the СSC content, as assessed by all СSC determination methods used, compared to 2DK cells. The radioresistance of MCF-7 CSCs when cultured as 2DK cells (D0=3.0±0.5 Gy) is twice as high as that of the total 2DK cell population (D0=1.5±0.2 Gy). The radioresistance of MCF-7 CSCs when cultured as 3DK cells does not differ from that of the total 3DK cell population (D0=2.5±0.3 and 2.2±0.3 Gy, respectively). The radiosensitivity of MCF-7 CSCs when cultured as 2DK and 3DK cells under the influence of γ-radiation is the same, despite the higher radioresistance of the overall 3DK cell population. 3DK cells, as well as CSCs in 3DK, are characterized by a higher capacity for sublethal damage repair, assessed by the Dq value, than in 2DK, although these differences were statistically insignificant.
Conclusion: The radioresistance of MCF-7 CSCs when cultured as 2DK cells is twice as high as that of the entire 2D cell population, while when cultured as 3DK cells, the radioresistance of CSCs and the entire cell population is equal. The radiosensitivity of MCF-7 CSCs when cultured as 2DK and 3DK to γ-irradiation is equal, despite the higher radioresistance of the entire 3DK cell population than that of 2DK cells.
Keywords: cancer stem cells, radiosensitivity, breast cancer, cell culture, MCF-7 line, 2D culture, 3D culture, mammospheres
For citation: Shuvatova VG, Shaposhnikova DA, Kondratyev KV, Moskaleva EYu. Radiosensitivity of MCF-7 Human Breast Cancer Stem Cells cultured as 2D- and 3D-Cultures. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026;71(4):12–20. DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-12-20
References
1. Хмелевский Е.В., Трофимова О.П. Рак молочной железы // Стандарты лучевой терапии / Под ред. А.Д. Каприна, А.А. Костина, Е.В. Хмелевского. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа, 2020. С. 253-269 [Khmelevskiy Ye.V., Trofimova O.P. Breast Cancer. Standarty Luchevoy Terapii = Standards of Radiation Therapy. Ed. A.D. Kaprin, A.A. Kostin, Ye.V. Khmelevskiy. Moscow, GEOTAR-Media Publ.,2020. P. 253-259 (In Russ.)]. URL: https://www.rosmedlib.ru/book/ISBN9785970455814.html.
2. Шахзадова А.О., Старинский В.В., Лисичникова И.В. Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2022 году // Сибирский онкологический журнал. 2023. Т.22. №5. С. 5-13 [Shakhzadova A.O., Starinskiy V.V., Lisichnikova I.V. State of Oncological Care for the Population of Russia in 2022. Sibirskiy Onkologicheskiy Zhurnal = Siberian Journal of Oncology. 2023;22;5:5-13 (In Russ.)]. Doi: 10.21294/1814-4861-2023-22-5-5-13.
3. Korzets Y., Levitas D., Grubstein A., Corn B.W., Amir E., Goldvaser H. Efficacy and Safety of the Addition of Internal Mammary Irradiation to Standard Adjuvant Radiation in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Curr Oncol. 2022;29;9:6657-6673. Doi: 10.3390/curroncol29090523.
4. Bonnet D., Dick J.E. Human Acute Myeloid Leukemia is Organized as a Hierarchy that Originates from a Primitive Hematopoietic Cell. Nat Med. 1997;3;7:730-7. Doi: 10.1038/nm0797-730. PMID: 9212098.
5. Reya T., Morrison S.J., Clarke M.F., Weissman I.L. Stem Cells, Cancer, and Cancer Stem Cells. Nature. 2001;414;6859:105-11. Doi: 10.1038/35102167. PMID: 11689955.
6. Al-Hajj M., Wicha M.S., Benito-Hernandez A., Morrison S.J., Clarke M.F. Prospective Identification of Tumorigenic Breast Cancer Cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100;7:3983-8. Doi: 10.1073/pnas.0530291100. PMID: 12629218.
7. Dontu G., Abdallah W.M., Foley J.M., Jackson K.W., Clarke M.F., Kawamura M.J., Wicha M.S. In Vitro Propagation and Transcriptional Profiling of Human Mammary Stem/Progenitor Cells. Genes Dev. 2003;17;10:1253-70. Doi: 10.1101/gad.1061803. PMID: 12756227.
8. Ponti D., Costa A., Zaffaroni N., Pratesi G., Petrangolini G., Coradini D., Pilotti S., Pierotti M.A., Daidone M.G. Isolation and in Vitro Propagation of Tumorigenic Breast Cancer Cells with Stem/Progenitor Cell Properties. Cancer Res. 2005;65;13:5506-11. Doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-0626. PMID: 15994920.
9. Wang J.L., Yu J.P., Sun Z.Q., Sun S.P. Radiobiological Characteristics of Cancer Stem Cells from Esophageal Cancer Cell Lines. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20;48:18296-305. Doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i48.18296. PMID: 25561796.
10. Phillips T.M., McBride W.H., Pajonk F. The Response of CD24(-/low)/CD44+ Breast Cancer-Initiating Cells to Radiation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98;24:1777-85. Doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj495. PMID: 17179479.
11. Krause M., Dubrovska A., Linge A., Baumann M. Cancer Stem Cells: Radioresistance, Prediction of Radiotherapy Outcome and Specific Targets for Combined Treatments. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2017;109:63-73. Doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2016.02.002. PMID: 26877102.
12. Zamulaeva I.A., Selivanova E.I., Kiseleva V.I., Matchuk O.N., Krikunova L.I., Mkrtchyan L.S., Kaprin A.D. Correlation of Radiation Response of Cervical Cancer Stem Cells with their Initial Number before Treatment and Molecular Genetic Features of Papillomavirus Infection. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2020;170;2:241-245. Doi: 10.1007/s10517-020-05043-w.
13. Zamulaeva I., Selivanova E., Matchuk O., Kiseleva V., Mkrtchyan L., Krikunova L. Radiation Response of Cervical Cancer Stem Cells is Associated with Pretreatment Proportion of These Cells and Physical Status of HPV DNA. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22;3:1445. Doi: 10.3390/ijms22031445. PMID: 33535561.
14. He L., Wick N., Germans S.K., Peng Y. The Role of Breast Cancer Stem Cells in Chemoresistance and Metastasis in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Cancers. 2021;13;24:6209. Doi: 10.3390/cancers13246209. PMID: 34944829.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest.The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The work was carried out as part of the state assignment for the Kurchatov Institute.
Contribution. V.G. Shuvatova – development of the research design, conducting experiments, analysis of the obtained results, and writing the article; D.A. Shaposhnikova – conducting and analyzing the data of experiments using flow cytometry; K.V. Kondratyev – dosimetric analysis and conducting γ-irradiation sessions of cells; E.Yu. Moskaleva – development of the research concept, data analysis, writing, and scientific editing of the article.
Article received: 20.03.2026. Accepted for publication: 25.04.2026.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026. Vol. 71. № 4
DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-32-37
A.V. Titov1, Iu.S. Belskikh1, N.K. Shandala1, T.A. Doroneva1, M.P. Semenova1, A.A. Shitova1, A.A. Filonova1, S.L. Burtcev1, Dm.M. Alekseev1, D.M. Alekseev1, E.Iu. Zezulina2
RADIO-ECOLOGICAL SITUATION IN THE TERRITORY OF URANIUM DEPOSITS IN KALMYKIA
1 A.I. Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia
2 Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology № 101, Lermontov, Russia
Contact person: A.V. Titov, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: To assess radio-ecological situation in the territory of uranium deposits in Kalmykia (Buratinskoye and Yashkulskoye) upon completion of geological and exploration activities.
Material and methods: To measure the ambient dose equivalent rate the method of automobile and pedestrian gamma survey was used with the help of portable spectrometric complex MKS-01A Multirad-M and dosimeter-radiometer MKS-AT6101. The activity of gamma-emitting radionuclides in soil samples was measured using a stationary gamma spectrometer from CANBERRA (USA). The activities of 210Po and 210Pb were measured using a radiometric installation UMF-2000 following their radiochemical separation from samples. Volumetric activity and equilibrium equivalent volumetric activity of radon were measured with an aerosol alpha radiometer for radon and thoron RAA-20P2 Poisk.
Results: The average value of ambient dose equivalent rate in the territory of Yashkulskoye and Buratinskoye deposits (excluding the location of the geological team) is 0.11±0.01 µSv/h, and in the territory of the nearest settlements (Verkhniy Yashkul and Orgakin villages), this value is 0.10±0.01 µSv/h. In the territory of Buratinskoye deposit (excluding the location of the geological team) and at the Yashkulskoye deposit, the specific activities of natural radionuclides in soil are the same as those in the nearest settlements (Orgakin and Verkhniy Yashkul villages) and correspond to their contents in the surface 20 cm layer of light chestnut soils in Kalmykia. At the site of the former waste storage facility (Buratinskoye deposit). the specific activity values of 238U, 235U, 226Ra, 210Pb and 210Po radionuclides in soil are 3580±30, 170±20, 2080±100, 1240±20 and 1480±190 Bq/kg, respectively. And the specific activity values of 232Th and 40K are not different from the contents in the rest of the area.
Conclusions: The radiation situation in the territory of the deposits and in the nearest settlements corresponds in general to the natural background in Kalmykia. No additional radiation impact from geological exploration on the population involved in the economic activities in the deposit areas or on the environment has been revealed. The exception is a small area of the Buratinskoye deposit near the former location of the geological team at the site of waste storage facility (core storage facility).
Keywords: radio-ecological survey, natural radionuclides, radon, the specific activity, uranium deposit, Kalmykia
For citation: Titov AV, Belskikh IuS, Shandala NK, Doroneva TA, Semenova MP, Shitova AA, Filonova AA, Burtcev SL, Alekseev DmM, Alekseev DM, Zezulina EIu. Radio-ecological Situation in the Territory of Uranium Deposits in Kalmykia. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026;71(4):32–37. DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-32-37
References
1. Mashkovtsev G.A., Konstantinov A.K., Miguta A.K., Shumilin M.V., Shchetochkin V.N. Uran Rossiyskikh Nedr = Uranium from Russian Subsoil. Moscow, Vserossiyskiy Nauchno-Issledovatel’skiy Institut Mineral’nogo Syr’ya im. N.M. Fedorovskogo Publ., 2010. 850 p. (In Russ.).
2. Pyatov Ye.A. Strane byl Nuzhen Uran. Istoriya Geologorazvedochnykh Rabot na Uran v SSSR = The Country Needed Uranium. History of Geological Exploration for Uranium in the USSR. Ed. Mashkovtsev G.A. Moscow, Vserossiyskiy Nauchno-Issledovatel’skiy Institut Mineral’nogo Syr’ya im. N.M. Fedorovskogo Publ., 2005. 246 p. (In Russ.).
3. List of Subsoil Plots of Federal Significance, Amended in Connection with the Entry into Force of Federal Law No. 279-FZ of 03.07.2016 (Solid Minerals) as Amended on 12.08.2025 (In Russ.). URL: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_207671/.
4. Beschaskina N.V. Issues of Geoecology and Land Reclamation when Drilling Exploration Wells. Nauchnyy Aspekt. Geologiya = Scientific Aspect. Geology. 2024;6:13368 (In Russ.). URL: https://na-journal.ru/6-2024-geologiya/13368-voprosy-geoekologii-i-rekultivacii-zemel-ekologii-pri-burenii-geologorazvedochnyh-skvajin.
5. Podolyak A.V., Dmitriyev A.N. Fundamentals of Environmental Legislation and Sources of Pollution when Drilling Water Wells. Moskovskiy Ekonomicheskiy Zhurnal = Moscow Economic Journal. 2023;6:400-48 (In Russ.). URL: https://qje.su/rekreacia-i-turizm/moskovskijekonomicheskij-zhurnal-6-2023-22/.
6. Kraynev A.M., Nazarov A.G., Tsutskin Ye.V. Distribution of Natural and Artificial Radionuclides in the Desert Zone of Kalmykia. Problemy Ekologii = Problems of Ecology. Moscow Publ., 2004. P. 138-142 (In Russ.).
7. Kasatkin V.V., Kasatkin A.V., Il’ichev V.A., Sedov N.S., Vasilenko Ye.M., Yevdokimov S.V. Radioecological Studies after the Completion of Exploration Work at the Tomtorskoye Rare Metal Deposit (Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)). Radiatsionnaya Gigiyena = Radiation Hygiene. 2018;11;4:18-27 (In Russ.). Doi: 10.21514/1998-426X-2018-11-4-18-27.
8. Katkova M.N., Bogachova Ye.G., Polyanskaya O.N., Zubachova A.A., Kozlova Ye.G., Yakhryushin V.N., Stepanova K.V., Yepifanov A.O. Radiatsionnaya Obstanovka na Territorii Rossii i Sopredel’nykh Gosudarstv v 2024 Godu = Radiation Situation on the Territory of Russia and Neighboring States in 2024. Yearbook. Obninsk, NPO Tayfun Publ., 2025. 345 p. (In Russ.).
9. EGASMRO. Current Data on the Radiation Situation in the Russian Federation (In Russ.). URL: https://egasmro.ru/ru/.
10. Titov A.V., Bel’skikh Yu.S., Isayev D.V., Shandala N.K., Doron’yeva T.A., Bogdanov I.I., Semenova M.P., Shitova A.A., Burtsev S.L. Radioecological Situation in the Area of the Uranium Legacy Site – the Stepnaya Mine (Kalmykia). Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost’ = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2024;69;1:41–49 (In Russ.). Doi: 10.33266/1024-6177-2024-69-1-41-49.
11. On the Criteria for Classifying Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Waste as Radioactive Waste, the Criteria for Classifying Radioactive Waste as Special Radioactive Waste and as Disposable Radioactive Waste, and the Criteria for Classifying Disposable Radioactive Waste. Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 19, 2012, No.1069 (In Russ.).
12. Unkanzhinov G.D., Uskova B.Ts., Boldyreva L.A., Tertyshnaya A.G. Natural Radionuclides in Soils of Benchmark Sites in the Republic of Kalmykia. Plodorodiye = Plodorodie. 2012;6:43-45 (In Russ.).
13. Rezul’taty Radiatsionno-Gigiyenicheskoy Pasportizatsii v Sub”yektakh Rossiyskoy Federatsii za 2006 god = Results of Radiation-Hygienic Certification in the Subjects of the Russian Federation for 2006. Radiation-Hygienic Certificate of the Russian Federation. Moscow, Federal’nyy Tsentr Gigiyeny i Epidemiologii Rospotrebnadzora Publ., 2007. 94 p. (In Russ.).
14. On Standards for Livestock Loads on Pastures in the Republic of Kalmykia. Order of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kalmykia dated February 24, 2025, No.39-p.5 (In Russ.).
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest.The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The work was financed under the State Contract as part of the Federal Target Program «Nuclear and Radiation Safety for 2016-2020 and for the period until 2030».
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.03.2026. Accepted for publication: 25.04.2026.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026. Vol. 71. № 4
DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-21-31
E.E. Karmanova1, S.B. Parfenyuk1, O.V. Glushkova1, S.V. Gudkov2, V.I. Novoselov1, M.G. Sharapov1
THE ROLE OF PEROXIREDOXINS IN THE RADIORESISTANCE OF CANCER CELLS
1 Institute of Cell Biophysics, Moscow Region, Pushchino, Russia
2 A.M. Prokhorov General Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: M.G. Sharapov, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Peroxiredoxins (Prdxs) are a family of thiol-dependent peroxidases involved in controlling intracellular ROS levels, redox signaling, protein folding, and the regulation of numerous signaling pathways. In cancer cells, Prdxs help maintain redox balance and support oncogenic processes, promoting proliferation, survival, and adaptation to oxidative stress. During radiotherapy, Prdxs act as key mediators of radioresistance. Their contribution to radioresistance stems from their involvement in the reduction of a broad range of hydroperoxides, the repair of DNA damage, metabolic reprogramming, maintenance of phenotypic plasticity, remodeling of the tumor microenvironment, and the regulation of various forms of cell death (apoptosis, ferroptosis, necroptosis).
This review summarizes current knowledge on the structural and functional characteristics of different Prdx isoforms and their regulation, as well as the mechanisms through which they participate in the cellular response to ionizing radiation. Promising strategies for overcoming radioresistance are discussed, including the use of Prdx inhibitors, their combination with targeted therapies, and approaches aimed at redox modulation and suppression of stress-adaptive mechanisms in cancer cells.
Keywords: peroxiredoxins, reactive oxygen species, cancer, radiotherapy, radioresistance, cell death
For citation: Karmanova EE, Parfenyuk SB, Glushkova OV, Gudkov SV, Novoselov VI, Sharapov MG. The Role of Peroxiredoxins in the Radioresistance of Cancer Cells. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026;71(4):21–31. DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-21-31
References
1. Porrazzo A., Cassandri M., D’Alessandro A., Morciano P., Rota R., Marampon F., Cenci G. DNA Repair in Tumor Radioresistance: Insights from Fruit Flies Genetics. Cell Oncol (Dordr). 2024;47;3:717–32. Doi: 10.1007/s13402-023-00906-6. PMID: 38095764.
2. Zhou T., Zhang L.Y., He J.Z., Miao Z.M., Li Y.Y., Zhang Y.M., Liu Z.W., Zhang S.Z., Chen Y., Zhou G.C., Liu Y.Q. Review: Mechanisms and Perspective Treatment of Radioresistance in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Front Immunol. 2023 Feb;14:1133899. Doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1133899. PMID: 36865554.
3. Hao J., Song Z., Su J., Li L., Zou L., Zou K. The PRX-1/TLR4 Axis Promotes Hypoxia-Induced Radiotherapy Resistance in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer by Targeting the NF-κB/p65 Pathway. Cell Signal. 2023;110:110806. Doi: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2023.110806. PMID: 37468052.
4. Sharapov M.G., Karmanova E.E., Gudkov S.V. Mechanisms of Cancer Cell Radioresistance: Modern Trends and Research Prospects. Biophysics. 2024;69:1064–88. Doi: 10.1134/S0006350924701161.
5. Guan X., Ruan Y., Che X., Feng W. Dual Role of PRDX1 in Redox-Regulation and Tumorigenesis: Past and Future. Free Radic Biol Med. 2024;210:120–9. Doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2023.11.009. PMID: 37977211.
6. Forshaw T.E., Holmila R., Nelson K.J., Lewis J.E., Kemp M.L., Tsang A.W., Poole L.B., Lowther W.T., Furdui C.M. Peroxiredoxins in Cancer and Response to Radiation Therapies. Antioxidants (Basel). 2019;8;1:11. Doi: 10.3390/antiox8010011. PMID: 30609657.
7. Egetemaier S.M., Chauvistré H., Váraljai R., Hua Y., Lueong S.S., Makhzami S., Srinivas N., Forster J., Ullrich V., Stupia S., Schroeder V., Scharfenberg S., Hoewner A., Shannan B., Siveke J.S., Baietti M.F., Leucci E., Marine J.C., Paschen A., Scheffler B., Engel D.R., Becker L.M., Thedieck K., Nensa F., Koester J., Grünwald B.T., Poepsel S., Ninck S., Kaschani F., Schadendorf D., Becker J.C., Tasdogan A., Rambow F., Roesch A. Redirecting Resistance Evolution in BRAFV600 Melanoma by Inhibition of the Peroxiredoxin-Thioredoxin System. Health Med Week. 2025;4:3417. Doi: 10.1101/2025.03.10.641595.
8. Kazama H., Wang Y.H., Tanaka J. Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Modulate the Expression of Peroxiredoxins 1 and 2 in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Cells. Leuk Res Rep. 2025;23:100508. Doi: 10.1016/j.lrr.2025.100508. PMID: 40206283.
9. Qausain S., Basheeruddin M. Unraveling the Peroxidase Activity in Peroxiredoxins: a Comprehensive Review of Mechanisms, Functions, and Biological Significance. Cureus. 2024;16;8:e66117. Doi: 10.7759/cureus.66117. PMID: 39229430.
10. Sharapov M.G., Goncharov R.G., Parfenyuk S.B., Glushkova O.V. Effect of Peroxiredoxin 6 on p53 Transcription Factor Level. Biochemistry (Mosc). 2022;87;8:839-49. Doi: 10.1134/S0006297922080156. PMID: 36171649.
11. Ben Diouf O., Gilbert A., Bernay B., Syljuasen R.G,. Tudor M., Temelie M., Savu D.I., Soumboundou M., Sall C., Chevalier F. Phospho-Proteomics Analysis of Early Response to X-Ray Irradiation Reveals Molecular Mechanism Potentially Related to U251 Cell Radioresistance. Proteomes. 2024;13;1:1. Doi: 10.3390/proteomes13010001. PMID: 39846632.
12. Shrestha J., Limbu K.R., Chhetri R.B., Paudel K.R., Hansbro P.M., Oh Y.S., Baek D.J., Ki S.H., Park E.Y. Antioxidant Genes in Cancer and Metabolic Diseases: Focusing on Nrf2, Sestrin, and heme Oxygenase 1. Int J Biol Sci. 2024;20;12:4888-907. Doi: 10.7150/ijbs.98846. PMID: 39309448.
13. Peng L., Xiong Y., Wang R., Xiang L., Zhou H., Fu Z. The Critical Role of Peroxiredoxin-2 in Colon Cancer Stem Cells. Aging (Albany NY). 2021;13;8:11170-87. Doi: 10.18632/aging.202784. PMID: 33819194.
14. Moretton A., Kourtis S., Gañez Zapater A., Calabrò C., Espinar Calvo M.L., Fontaine F., Darai E., Abad Cortel E., Block S., Pascual-Reguant L., Pardo-Lorente N., Ghose R., Vander Heiden M.G., Janic A., Müller A.C., Loizou J.I., Sdelci S. A Metabolic Map of the DNA Damage Response Identifies PRDX1 in the Control of Nuclear ROS Scavenging and Aspartate Availability. Mol Syst Biol. 2023;19;7:e11267. Doi: 10.15252/msb.202211267. PMID: 37259925.
15. Abdullah N.A., Md Hashim N.F., Muhamad Zakuan N., Chua J.X. Thioredoxin System in Colorectal Cancer: its Role in Carcinogenesis, Disease Progression, and Response to Treatment. Life Sci. 2024;348:122711. Doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122711. PMID: 38734065.
16. Gu X., Mu C., Zheng R., Zhang Z., Zhang Q., Liang T. The Cancer Antioxidant Regulation System in Therapeutic Resistance. Antioxidants (Basel). 2024;13;7:778. Doi: 10.3390/antiox13070778. PMID: 39061847.
17. Dai X., Xi M., Li J. Cancer Metastasis: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Interventions. Mol Biomed. 2025;6;1:20. Doi: 10.1186/s43556-025-00261-y. PMID: 40192949.
18. Zhang K., Nie J., Wu Y., Lu Z., Qiu Z., Li Z., Zhong Y., Cheng H. Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Targeted Photodynamic Degrader to Activate Breast Cancer Immunity by Intensifying Immunogenic Cell Death and Downregulating PD-L1. Chem Eng J. 2025;507:160811. Doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2025.160811.
19. Nguyen V.K., Tsai S.W., Cho I.C., Chao T.C., Hsiao I.T., Huang H.C., Liaw J.W. Gold Nanoparticle-Enhanced Production of Reactive Oxygen Species for Radiotherapy and Phototherapy. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2025;15;4:317. Doi: 10.3390/nano15040317. PMID: 39997879.
20. Liu Y., Wang P., Hu W., Chen D. New Insights into the Roles of Peroxiredoxins in Cancer. Biomed Pharmacother. 2023;164:114896. Doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2023.114896. PMID: 37210897.
21. Zhao K., Zhao T., Yang R., Liu J., Hu M. Peroxiredoxin 2 as a Potential Prognostic Biomarker Associated with Angiogenesis in Cervical Squamous Cell Cancer. Oncol Lett. 2024;28;1:328. Doi: 10.3892/ol.2024.14461. PMID: 38807674.
22. Yoon Y.J., Lee Y.J., Choi J., Chi S.W., Lee S., Park K.C., Kwon B.M., Han D.C. 2′-Hydroxycinnamaldehyde Induces ROS-mediated Apoptosis in Cancer Cells by Targeting PRX1 and PRX2. Results Chem. 2025;13:101931. Doi: 10.1016/j.rechem.2024.101931.
23. Pace P.E., Fu L., Hampton M.B., Winterbourn C.C. Effect of Peroxiredoxin 1 or Peroxiredoxin 2 Knockout on the Thiol Proteome of Jurkat Cells. Free Radic Biol Med. 2024 Nov 20;225:595–604. Doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2024.10.293. PMID: 39427748.
24. Gibson V., Rogel J., Dzialo J., Messier T., Habibovic A., Poile C., Nakas A., Kutywayo K., Bzura A., Naumov G., Fennell D., Cunniff B. Peroxiredoxin 3 is a Key Regulator of Mesothelioma Progression and a Target for Therapeutic Intervention [Abstract]. Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025. Part 1 (Regular Abstracts). Chicago, 2025 Apr 25-30; Philadelphia, AACR. Cancer Res 2025;85;8 Suppl 1: Abstract nr 4259.
25. Liao J., Zhang Y., Yang J., Chen L., Zhang J., Chen X. Peroxiredoxin 6 in Stress Orchestration and Disease Interplay. Antioxidants (Basel). 2025;14;4:379. Doi: 10.3390/antiox14040379. PMID: 40298631.
26. Lagal D.J., Ortiz-Alcántara Á., Pedrajas J.R., McDonagh B., Bárcena J.A., Requejo-Aguilar R., Padilla C.A. Loss of Peroxiredoxin 6 Alters Lipid Composition and Distribution Resulting in Increased Sensitivity to Ferroptosis. Biochem J. 2024;481;24:1997-2015. Doi: 10.1042/BCJ20240445. PMID: 39601357.
27. Lagal D.J., Montes-Osuna A.M., Ortiz-Olivencia A., Arribas-Parejas C., Ortiz-Alcántara Á., Pescuezo-Castillo C., Bárcena J.A., Padilla C.A., Requejo-Aguilar R. Tumoral Malignancy Decreases Coupled with higher ROS and Lipid Peroxidation in HCT116 Colon Cancer Cells Upon Loss of PRDX6. Antioxidants (Basel). 2024;13;7:881. Doi: 10.3390/antiox13070881. PMID: 39061949.
28. Cao X., Chen X.M., Xiao W.Z., Li B., Zhang B., Wu Q., Xue Q. ROS-Mediated Hypomethylation of PRDX5 Promotes STAT3 Binding and Activates the Nrf2 Signaling Pathway in NSCLC. Int J Mol Med. 2021;47;2:573–82. Doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2020.4819. PMID: 33416106.
29. Ou Y., Shen C., Chen Z., Liu T., Peng Y., Zong D., Ouyang R. TDP43/HDAC6/Prdx1 Signaling Pathway Participated in the Cognitive Impairment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Via Regulating Inflammation and Oxidative Stress. Int Immunopharmacol. 2024;127:111350. Doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2023.111350. PMID: 38104368.
30. Labbé M., Chang M., Saintpierre B., Letourneur F., de Beaurepaire L., Véziers J., Deshayes S., Cotinat M., Fonteneau J.F., Blanquart C., Potiron V., Supiot S., Fradin D. Loss of miR-200c-3p Promotes Resistance to Radiation Therapy Via the DNA Repair Pathway in Prostate Cancer. Cell Death Dis. 2024;15;10:751. Doi: 10.1038/s41419-024-07133-3. PMID: 39414799.
31. Jiang Y., Cao W., Wu K., Qin X., Wang X., Li Y., Yu B., Zhang Z., Wang X., Yan M., Xu Q., Zhang J., Chen W. LncRNA LINC00460 Promotes EMT in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma by Facilitating Peroxiredoxin-1 Into the Nucleus. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2019;38;1:365. Doi: 10.1186/s13046-019-1364-z. PMID: 31429766.
32. Zhang R., Chen D. O-GlcNAcylation of PRDX1 and Radiation Resistance in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer via Suppressing TRIM21 Mediated Ubiquitination. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2024;120;2:S30–S31. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.07.041.
33. Sun H.N., Ma D.Y., Guo X.Y., Hao Y.Y., Jin M.H., Han Y.H., Jin X., Kwon T. Peroxiredoxin I and II as Novel Therapeutic Molecular Targets in Cervical Cancer Treatment through Regulation of Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Induced by Bleomycin. Cell Death Discov. 2024;10;1:267. Doi: 10.1038/s41420-024-02039-7. PMID: 38821929.
34. Yang W., Zhu Z., Zhou C., Chen J., Ou J., Tong H., Iyaswamy A., Chen P., Wei X., Yang C., Xiao W., Wang J., Zhang W. The Rheumatoid Arthritis drug Auranofin Targets Peroxiredoxin 1 and Peroxiredoxin 2 to Trigger ROS-Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Axis-Mediated Cell Death and Cytoprotective Autophagy. Free Radic Biol Med. 2025;233:1–12. Doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2025.03.016. PMID: 40089079.
35. Zhou Y., Wang M., Qian Y., Yu D., Zhang J., Fu M., Zhang X., Qin R., Ji R., Zhang X., Gu J. PRDX2 Promotes Gastric Cancer Progression by Forming a Feedback Loop with PKM2/STAT3 Axis. Cell Signal. 2025;127:111586. Doi: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2024.111586. PMID: 39761843.
36. Feng K., Li X., Bai Y., Zhang D., Tian L. Mechanisms of Cancer Cell Death Induction by Triptolide: A Comprehensive Overview. Heliyon. 2024;10;2:e24335. Doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24335. PMID: 38293343.
37. Skoko J.J., Cao J., Gaboriau D., Attar M., Asan A., Hong L., Paulsen C.E., Ma H., Liu Y., Wu H., Harkness T., Furdui C.M., Manevich Y., Morrison C.G., Brown E.T., Normolle D., Spies M., Spies M.A., Carroll K., Neumann C.A. Redox Regulation of RAD51 Cys319 and Homologous Recombination by Peroxiredoxin 1. Redox Biol. 2022;56:102443. Doi: 10.1016/j.redox.2022.102443. PMID: 36058112.
38. Liao H., Yang S., Liang Z., Xiao L., Xie S., Lin P., Xia F., Fang C., Chen Q., Ling D., Li F. A Cancer Cell Selective Replication Stress Nano Amplifier Promotes Replication Fork Catastrophe to Overcome Radioresistance. ACS Nano. 2023;17;18:18548–61. Doi: 10.1021/acsnano.3c06774. PMID: 37706454.
39. An D., Zhai D., Wan C., Yang K. The Role of Lipid Metabolism in Cancer Radioresistance. Clin Transl Oncol. 2023;25;8:2332–49. Doi: 10.1007/s12094-023-03134-4. PMID: 37079212.
40. Li J., Li W., Li L., Wang W., Zhang M., Tang X. Induction of Peroxiredoxin 1 by Hypoxia Promotes Cellular Autophagy and Cell Proliferation in Oral Leukoplakia via HIF-1α/BNIP3 Pathway. J Mol Histol. 2024;55;4:403–13. Doi: 10.1007/s10735-024-10197-2. PMID: 38758520.
41. Jezierska-Drutel A., Attaran S., Hopkins B.L., Skoko J.J., Rosenzweig S.A., Neumann C.A. The peroxidase PRDX1 Inhibits the Activated Phenotype in Mammary Fibroblasts through Regulating c-Jun N-Terminal Kinases. BMC Cancer. 2019;19;1:812. Doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-6031-4. PMID: 31419957.
42. Wang L.Y., Liu X.J., Li Q.Q., Zhu Y., Ren H.L., Song J.N., Zeng J., Mei J., Tian H.X., Rong D.C., Zhang S.H. The Romantic History of Signaling Pathway Discovery in Cell Death: an Updated Review. Mol Cell Biochem. 2024;479;9:2255–72. Doi: 10.1007/s11010-023-04873-2. PMID: 37851176.
43. Hill R.M., Fok M., Grundy G., Parsons J.L., Rocha S. The Role of Autophagy in Hypoxia-Induced Radioresistance. Radiother Oncol. 2023;189:109951. Doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109951. PMID: 37838322.
44. Sun H.H., Li Y.L., Jiang H., Yin X.H., Jin X.L. PRDX1 Influences the Occurrence and Progression of Liver Cancer by Inhibiting Mitochondrial Apoptosis Pathway. Cell J. 2022;24;11:657–4. Doi: 10.22074/cellj.2022.8159. PMID: 36377215.
45. Liu W., Xu L., Wang X., Zhang D., Sun G., Wang M., Wang M., Han Y., Chai R., Wang H. PRDX1 Activates Autophagy via the PTEN-AKT Signaling Pathway to Protect against Cisplatin-Induced spiral Ganglion Neuron Damage. Autophagy. 2021 Dec;17;12:4159–81. Doi: 10.1080/15548627.2021.1905466. PMID: 33749526.
46. Li J., Sun Y., Zhao X., Ma Y., Xie Y., Liu S., Hui B., Shi X., Sun X., Zhang X. Radiation Induces IRAK1 Expression to Promote Radioresistance by Suppressing Autophagic Cell Death Via Decreasing the Ubiquitination of PRDX1 in Glioma Cells. Cell Death Dis. 2023;14;4:259. Doi: 10.1038/s41419-023-05732-0. PMID: 37031183.
47. Yu G., Song X., Chen Q., Zhou Y. Silencing of Peroxiredoxin III Inhibits Formaldehyde-Induced Oxidative Damage of Bone Marrow Cells in BALB/c Mice. Environ Toxicol. 2023;38;12:2836–44. Doi: 10.1002/tox.23915. PMID: 37584494.
48. López-Grueso M.J., Lagal D.J., García-Jiménez Á.F., Tarradas R.M., Carmona-Hidalgo B., Peinado J., Requejo-Aguilar R., Bárcena J.A., Padilla C.A. Knockout of PRDX6 Induces Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Cell Cycle Arrest at G2/M in HepG2 Hepatocarcinoma Cells. Redox Biol. 2020;37:101737. Doi: 10.1016/j.redox.2020.101737. PMID: 33035814.
49. Chen X., Zhang L., He Y., Huang S., Chen S., Zhao W., Yu D. Regulation of m6A Modification on Ferroptosis and its Potential Significance in Radiosensitization. Cell Death Discov. 2023;9;1:343. Doi: 10.1038/s41420-023-01645-1. PMID: 37714846.
50. Torres-Velarde J.M., Allen K.N., Salvador-Pascual A., Leija R.G., Luong D., Moreno-Santillán D.D., Ensminger D.C., Vázquez-Medina J.P. Peroxiredoxin 6 Suppresses Ferroptosis in Lung Endothelial Cells. Free Radic Biol Med. 2024;218:82–93. Doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2024.04.208. PMID: 38579937.
51. Janssens S., Rennen S., Agostinis P. Decoding Immunogenic Cell Death from a Dendritic Cell Perspective. Immunol Rev. 2024 Jan;321;1:350-370. Doi: 10.1111/imr.13301. PMID: 38093416.
52. Ding Y., Ye B., Sun Z., Mao Z., Wang W. Reactive Oxygen Species-Mediated Pyroptosis with the Help of Nanotechnology: Prospects for Cancer Therapy. Adv NanoBiomed Res. 2023;3;1:2200077. Doi: 10.1002/anbr.202200077.
53. Rius-Pérez S. P53 at the Crossroad between Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species and Necroptosis. Free Radic Biol Med. 2023;207:183–93. Doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2023.07.022. PMID: 37481144.
54. Li Y., Zhu Y., Shang F.F., Xu L., Jiang D., Sun B., Zhang L., Luo C., Zhang A., Zhang H., Ding C. Discovery of Urea Derivatives of Celastrol as Selective Peroxiredoxin 1 Inhibitors against Colorectal Cancer Cells. J Med Chem. 2024;67;9:7176–96. Doi: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.4c00023. PMID: 38679872.
55. Liu X., Zheng T., Bao Y., Li P., Zhao T., Liu Y., Wang H., Sun C. Genistein Implications in Radiotherapy: Kill Two Birds with One Stone. Molecules. 2025;30;1:188. Doi: 10.3390/molecules30010188. PMID: 39795243.
56. Farsiabi R., Khodadadi I., Karimi J., Shafiee Gh. The Effects of Genistein on Peroxiredoxin-4 and Oxidative Stress in Lung Cancer Cell Line A549. J Babol Univ Med Sci. 2024;26:e53. Doi: 10.22088/jbums.26.1.53.
57. Sun X., Wan X., Chen L., Cui Y., Chen X., Zhang J., Jiang X. Mitomycin Induced the Senescence of Alveolar Epithelial Cells by Targeting Peroxiredoxin I. Biochem Pharmacol. 2025;236:116890. Doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2025.116890. PMID: 40139326.
58. Zhang H.N., Xiao W.Q., Lee D.H., Li N., Feng Y.Y., Su T., Gu H.Y., Yoon I., Jung H., Lee K.H., Cho H.J., Han Y.H., Sun H.N., Kwon T. Cisplatin Induces Kidney Cell Death via ROS-dependent MAPK Signaling Pathways by Targeting Peroxiredoxin I and II in African Green Monkey (Chlorocebus Aethiops Sabaeus) Kidney Cells. In Vivo. 2024;38;2:630–9. Doi: 10.21873/invivo.13482. PMID: 38418129; PMCID: PMC10905483.
59. Pan S., Li Y., Zhang J. 6-Shogaol Prevents Benzo(a)pyrene-Exposed Lung Carcinogenesis via Modulating PRDX1-Associated Oxidative Stress, Inflammation, and Proliferation in Mouse Models. Environ Toxicol. 2024;39;1:75–84. Doi: 10.1002/tox.23946. PMID: 37638803.
60. Wei T., Wang X., Lang K., Song Y., Luo J., Gu Z., Yang D., Song Y. Peroxiredoxin 6 Protects Pulmonary Epithelial Cells from Cigarette-related Ferroptosis in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Inflammation. 2025;48;2:662–75. Doi: 10.1007/s10753-024-02077-4. PMID: 38954261.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest.The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The work was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Science Foundation, project No. 24-24-00070.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.03.2026. Accepted for publication: 25.04.2026.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026. Vol. 71. № 4
DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-38-46
S.V. Fesenko
CONCEPT FOR AGRICULTURAL RESPONSE IN THE EVENT OF RADIATION ACCIDENT
National Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: Sergey Viktorovich Fesenko, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Analysis of the radiological aspects of emergency response in agriculture, including the definition of the goals, objectives, and principles of agricultural emergency response; refinement of emergency plans and response strategies; the use of reference levels and operational intervention levels; public communication; and the establishment of necessary response capacity.
Material and methods: The concept was developed based on a critical analysis of past experience in agricultural emergency response and a synthesis of international emergency response recommendations.
Results: The specific features of emergency response in agriculture were considered. It was noted that agriculture is one of the most vulnerable sectors in the event of a radiation accident, the consequences of which are long-term and complex (radiological, socio-economic, psychological). The role of monitoring in making operational emergency response decisions was defined. The goals and objectives of agricultural emergency response were outlined. The main principles of emergency response were presented. The necessity of establishing and utilizing an operational correlation between the ambient dose equivalent rate – a parameter that can be measured easily and quickly in the field – and permissible levels of radionuclides in agricultural products was demonstrated. The need for the advanced creation of a comprehensive response capacity, including adaptive plans, trained personnel, and regular drills that consider not only technical measures but also human factors, was emphasized.
Conclusions: Emergency response in the agro-industrial complex following radiation accidents is a complex, multi-faceted task, the success of which depends on advance preparation, flexibility, and consideration of the full spectrum of consequences. Key factors for effectiveness are the shift from response based on monitoring data to response based on prognosis; the use of operational intervention levels for rapid decision-making; active public involvement; and a comprehensive approach aimed not only at radiological protection but also at the socio-economic recovery of affected territories.
Keywords: radiation accident, agriculture, population, radiation dose, emergency response, standards, permissible levels, food products
For citation: Fesenko SV. Concept for Agricultural Response in the Event of Radiation Accident. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026;71(4):38–46. DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-38-46
References
1. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: Report to the General Assembly. Scientific Annex A: Levels and Effects of Radiation Exposure Due to the Nuclear Accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR 2013). New York, UN. 2016.
2. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: Report to the General Assembly. Annex B: Radiation Exposures from Electricity Generation. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. United Nations. 2016.
3. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: Report to the General Assembly. Scientific Annex A: Levels and Effects of Radiation Exposure Due to the Nuclear Accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR 2021-2022). New York, UN. 2023.
4. Фесенко С.В. Уроки радиоэкологического мониторинга в районах расположения атомных электростанций. Мониторинг природных и сельскохозяйственных экосистем в районах расположения атомных электростанций // Труды ВНИИРАЭ / Под ред. С.В. Фесенко. Т.3. Обнинск: Всероссийский научно-исследовательский институт радиологии и агроэкологии, 2020. С. 158–167 [Fesenko S.V. Lessons from Radioecological Monitoring in Areas of Nuclear Power Plants. Monitoring Natural and Agricultural Ecosystems in Areas of Nuclear Power Plants. Trudy VNIIRAE = Proceedings of VNIIRAE. Vol. 3. Ed. S.V. Fesenko. Obninsk, Vserossiyskiy Nauchno-Issledovatel’skiy Institut Radiologii i Agroekologii Publ., 2020. P. 158-167 (In Russ.)].
5. Алексахин Р.М., Крышев И.И., Фесенко С.В. и др. Радиоэкологические проблемы ядерной энергетики // Атомная энергия. 1990. Т.68. №5. С. 320-327 [Aleksakhin R.M., Kryshev I.I., Fesenko S.V., et al. Radioecological Problems of Nuclear Energy. Atomnaya Energiya = Atomic Energy. 1990;68;5:320-327 (In Russ.)].
6. Алексахин Р.М., Булдаков Л.А., Губанов В.А. и др. Крупные радиационные аварии: последствия и защитные меры / Под ред. Ильина Л.А., Губанова В.А. M.: ИздАТ, 2001. 751 с. [Aleksakhin R.M., Buldakov L.A., Gubanov V.A., et al. Krupnyye Radiatsionnyye Avarii: Posledstviya i Mery Zashchity = Major Radiation Accidents: Consequences and Protective Measures. Ed. Il’in L.A, Gubanov V.A. Moscow, IzdAT Publ., 2001. 751 p. (In Russ.)].
7. Фесенко С.В. Сравнительный анализ последствий аварий на Чернобыльской АЭС и АЭС «Фукусима 1» (Япония) для сельского хозяйства и природных экосистем // Атомная энергия. 2023. Т.135. №5. С. 149–158 [Fesenko S.V. Comparative Analysis of the Consequences of the Accidents at the Chernobyl NPP and the Fukushima-1 NPP (Japan) for Agriculture and Natural Ecosystems. Atomnaya Energiya = Atomic Energy. 2023;135;5:149-158 (In Russ.)].
8. Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and Their Remediation: Twenty Years of Experience. Report of the Chernobyl Forum Expert Group Environment. Vienna, IAEA, 2006. 180 p.
9. Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-2-R. Vienna, IAEA, 2015. 136 p.
10. Военная доктрина Российской Федерации. 2022 г. М: ГЦЕНТРМА, 2022. 24 с. [Voyennaya Doktrina Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2022 god = Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation. 2022. Moscow, GTSENTRMA Publ., 2022. 24 p.
(In Russ.)]
11. Санжарова Н.И., Фесенко С.В. Радиоэкологические последствия аварии на Чернобыльской АЭС: биологические эффекты, миграция, реабилитация загрязненных территорий: Монография. М.: РАН, 2018. 278 c. [Sanzharova N.I., Fesenko S.V. Radioekologicheskiye Posledstviya Avarii na Chernobyl’skoy AES: Biologicheskiye Effekty, Migratsiya, Reabilitatsiya Zagryaznennykh Territoriy = Radioecological Consequences of the Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant: Biological Effects, Migration, Rehabilitation of Contaminated Areas. Moscow, Rossiyskaya Akademiya Nauk Publ., 2018. 278 p. (In Russ.)].
12. Алексахин Р.М. Радиоэкологические уроки Чернобыля // Радиационная биология. Радиоэкология. 1993. Т.33. № 1. С. 14 [Aleksakhin R.M. Radioecological Lessons of Chernobyl. Radiatsionnaya Biologiya. Radioekologiya = Radiation Biology. Radioecology. 1993;33;1:14 (In Russ.)].
13. Crick M.J., Linsley G.S. An Assessment of the Radiological Impact of the Windscale Reactor Fire. International Journal of Radiation Biology. 1984;46;5:479–506.
14. Iranzo E., Richmond C.R. Plutonium Contamination Twenty Years after the Nuclear Accident in Spain. Tennessee, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1987.
15. The Radiological Accident in Goiania. Vienna, IAEA. 1988. 152 p.
16. Steinhauser G., Brandl A., Johnson T.E. Comparison of the Chernobyl and Fukushima Nuclear Accidents: a Review of the Environmental Impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 2014;470-471:800-817.
17. Ильин Л.А., Кенигсберг Я.Э., Линге И.И., Лихтарев И.А., Савкин М.Н. Радиационная защита населения при реагировании на Чернобыльскую аварию // Медицинская радиология и радиационная безопасность. 2016. Т.61. №3. С. 1–16 [Il’in L.A., Kenigsberg Ya.E., Linge I.I., Likhtarev I.A., Savkin M.N. Radiation Protection of the Population during the Response to the Chernobyl Accident. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost’ = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2016;61;3:1–16 (In Russ.)].
18. Шинкарев С.М. Самойлов А.С., Грановская Е.О., Корнева Е.А., Кухта Б.А., Андросова А.А., Яценко В.Н. Сравнительный анализ вклада короткоживущих изотопов йода в дозу облучения щитовидной железы у населения после Чернобыльской и Фукусимской аварий // Гигиена и санитария. 2017. Т.96. №9. С. 827–832 [Shinkarev S.M. Samoylov A.S., Granovskaya Ye.O., Korneva Ye.A., Kukhta B.A., Androsova A.A., Yatsenko V.N. Comparative Analysis of the Contribution of Short-Lived Iodine Isotopes to the Thyroid Gland Radiation Dose in the Population after the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents. Gigiyena i Sanitariya = Hygiene and Sanitation. 2017;96;9:827–832 (In Russ.)].
19. Uyba V., Samoylov A., Shinkarev S. Comparative Analysis of the Countermeasures Taken to Mitigate Exposure of the Public to Radioiodine Following the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents: Lessons from Both Accidents. J. Radiat. Res. 2018;59;S2:40-47.
20. Shinkarev S.M. Comparison of Thyroid Doses to the Public from Radioiodine Following the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents. Ann. ICRP. 2021;50;S1:174–180.
21. The Fukushima Daiichi Accident. Vienna, IAEA, 2015. Vol. 4. 222 p.
22. Fesenko S.V. Key Lessons from Major Radiation Accidents for Emergency Response in Agriculture. Atomic Energy. Springer. 2024;136;3:205–214.
23. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) 2016 Report. New York, UN, 2017. 508 p.
24. Fesenko S.V. A Comparative Analysis of the Consequences of Accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi (Japan) NPPs for Agriculture and the Environment. Atomic Energy. Springer. 2024;135;3–4:195–205.
25. Фесенко С.В. Уроки крупных радиационных аварий для аварийного реагирования в сельском хозяйстве // Атомная энергия. 2024. Т.136. №34. С. 160-167 [Fesenko S.V. Lessons from Major Radiation Accidents for Emergency Response in Agriculture. Atomnaya Energiya = Atomic Energy. 2024;136;34:160-167 (In Russ.)].
26. Operational Intervention Levels for Reactor Emergencies. Vienna, IAEA, 2017. 163 p.
27. Manual for First Responders to a Radiological Emergency, EPR. First Responders. 2006. Vienna, IAEA, 2006. 144 p.
28. Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR. Part 3. Vienna, IAEA, 2014. 471 p.
29. Generic Procedures for Assessment and Response during a Radiological Emergency, IAEA TECDOC1162. Vienna, IAEA, 2000. 193 p.
30. Barnekow U., Fesenko S., Kashparov V., Kis–Benedek G., et al. Guidelines on Soil and Vegetation Sampling for Radiological Monitoring. TRS 486. Vienna, IAEA, 2019. 247 p.
31. Handbook of Radioactivity Analysis. Ed. L’Annunziata M.F. 3rd. Elsevier, Academic Press 2012. 1418 p.
32. Communication with the Public in a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency. EPR Public Communications. Vienna, IAEA, 2014. 116 p.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest.The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. These studies were conducted as part of fundamental and applied research under the 2023–2027 Program of Activities of the Federal State Budgetary Institution National Research Center Kurchatov Institute (complex topic 5P.7. “Applied Genetic and Biotechnological Research for Agriculture”).
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.03.2026. Accepted for publication: 25.04.2026.