Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by E. Feinendegen, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by E. Feinendegen, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Radiation Protection Dosimetry 104:337-346 (2003)
© 2003 Oxford University Press

Relative implications of protective responses versus damage induction at low dose and low-dose-rate exposures, using the microdose approach

L. E. Feinendegen (INVITED)

In reviewing tissue effects of low-dose radiation (1) absorbed dose to tissue is replaced by the sum of energy deposited with track events in cell-equivalent tissue micromasses, i.e. with microdose hits, in the number of exposed micromasses and (2) induced cell damage and adaptive protection are related to microdose hits in exposed micromasses for a given radiation quality. DNA damage increases with the number of microdose hits. They also can induce adaptive protection, mainly against endogenous DNA damage. This protection involves cellular defenses, DNA repair and damage removal. With increasing numbers of low linear energy transfer (LET) microdose hits in exposed micromasses, adaptive protection first tends to outweigh damage and then (above 200 mGy) fails and largely disappears. These experimental data predict that cancer risk coefficients derived by epidemiology at high-dose irradiation decline at low doses and dose rates when adaptive protection outdoes DNA damage. The dose-risk function should include both linear and non-linear terms at low doses.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JNMHome page
G. Sgouros, S. J. Knox, M. C. Joiner, W. F. Morgan, and A. I. Kassis
MIRD Continuing Education: Bystander and Low Dose-Rate Effects: Are These Relevant to Radionuclide Therapy?
J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 1683 - 1691.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
C J Martin
Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures?
Br. J. Radiol., August 1, 2007; 80(956): 639 - 647.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
B. E. Leonard
Adaptive response by single cell radiation hits--implications for nuclear workers
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 20, 2005; 116(1-4): 387 - 391.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
L. E. Feinendegen and R. D. Neumann
Physics must join with biology in better assessing risk from low-dose irradiation
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(4): 346 - 356.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
L E Feinendegen
Evidence for beneficial low level radiation effects and radiation hormesis
Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2005; 78(925): 3 - 7.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
L E Feinendegen
Significance of basic and clinical research in radiation medicine: challenges for the future
Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2005; Supplement_27(1): 185 - 195.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.