Greenstock C L, Trivedi A
Health Sciences and Services Division, AECL Research, Chalk River Laboratories, Ontario, Canada.
Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 1994;61(2):81-130. doi: 10.1016/0079-6107(94)90007-8.
Biological dosimeters measure biologically relevant effects of radiation exposure that are in some sense an estimate of effective dose, whereas biophysical indicators serve as surrogates of absorbed dose in a manner analogous to conventional thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD). The biological and biophysical dosimeters have the potential to play an important role in assessing unanticipated or occupational radiation exposures. For example, where the exposure is large and uncertain (i.e. radiation accidents), accurate dose information can help in deciding the most appropriate therapy and medical treatment. Another useful area is that of lifetime accumulated dose determination, and the ability to distinguish between and integrate the exposures from natural and anthropogenic (medical X-rays, indoor radon, natural background radiation, occupational and non-occupational exposures). Also, the possibility to monitor individual response and differences in inherent or induced radiation sensitivity may have important implications for radiation protection. More commonly, this type of dosimetry could be used for routine monitoring to detect and quantify unsuspected exposure, for regulatory purposes or for epidemiological studies of the long-term effects of radiation exposure (e.g. in Japanese A-bomb survivors or in the population surrounding Chernobyl). This review is a comparative study of the existing techniques and their future prospects. It summarizes the sensitivity, reproducibility, limiting dose, dose-rate, energy, LET response, sources of variability and uncertainty, and other practical aspects of each bio-indicator. The strengths and weaknesses of each approach are evaluated on the basis of common criteria for particular applications, and are summarized for each assay both in the text and in tabular form, for convenience. It is clear that no single indicator qualifies to reliably measure occupational exposures at the current levels of sensitivity conventional dosimetry services provide. Most of the bio-techniques are applicable to the detection of relatively high radiation exposures at relatively short times after exposure. Some of the bio-indicators have been identified that are, or offer future prospects for becoming, appropriate bio-indicators for dosimetry needs. However, all methods are subject to biological and other variables that are presently uncontrolled, and represent a major source of uncertainty. These include variations in background signals not directly associated with radiation exposure, inter- and intra-individual variability of radiation response, and genetic and environmental effects. Although these factors contribute to the lack of confidence in biological dosimetry, promising bio-indicators may be applied to large populations to establish the inherent variability and confounding factors that limit quantitative data collection and analysis, and reduce reliability and reproducibility.
生物剂量计测量辐射暴露的生物学相关效应,从某种意义上讲,这些效应是有效剂量的一种估计,而生物物理指标则以类似于传统热释光剂量计(TLD)的方式作为吸收剂量的替代指标。生物剂量计和生物物理剂量计在评估意外或职业辐射暴露方面具有发挥重要作用的潜力。例如,在暴露量大且不确定的情况下(即辐射事故),准确的剂量信息有助于确定最合适的治疗方法。另一个有用的领域是终身累积剂量的测定,以及区分和整合来自自然和人为(医用X射线、室内氡、自然本底辐射、职业和非职业暴露)暴露的能力。此外,监测个体反应以及固有或诱导辐射敏感性差异的可能性可能对辐射防护具有重要意义。更常见的是,这种剂量测定可用于常规监测,以检测和量化未被怀疑的暴露,用于监管目的或用于辐射暴露长期影响的流行病学研究(例如在日本原子弹幸存者或切尔诺贝利周边人群中)。本综述是对现有技术及其未来前景的比较研究。它总结了每种生物指标的灵敏度、可重复性、极限剂量、剂量率、能量、传能线密度响应、变异性和不确定性来源以及其他实际方面。根据特定应用的通用标准评估每种方法的优缺点,并以文本和表格形式对每种测定方法进行总结,以便于参考。显然,在传统剂量测定服务提供的当前灵敏度水平下,没有单一指标能够可靠地测量职业暴露。大多数生物技术适用于在暴露后相对较短时间内检测相对较高的辐射暴露。已经确定了一些生物指标,它们目前是或有望成为满足剂量测定需求的合适生物指标。然而,所有方法都受到目前无法控制的生物学和其他变量的影响,这些变量是不确定性的主要来源。这些变量包括与辐射暴露无直接关联的背景信号变化、辐射反应的个体间和个体内变异性以及遗传和环境影响。尽管这些因素导致对生物剂量测定缺乏信心,但有前景的生物指标可应用于大量人群,以确定限制定量数据收集和分析、降低可靠性和可重复性的固有变异性和混杂因素。