Einloggen

Thematische Bibliographien / Radiation dose / Zeitschriftenartikel

Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: Radiation dose.

Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „Radiation dose“

Autor: Grafiati

Veröffentlicht am 4. Juni 2021

Zuletzt aktualisiert am 20. Februar 2023

Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an

Wählen Sie eine Art der Quelle aus:

Machen Sie sich mit Top-50 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "Radiation dose" bekannt.

Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.

Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.

Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.

1

Hansen, Joyce M., Niki Fidopiastis, Trabue Bryans, Michelle Luebke und Terri Rymer. „Radiation Sterilization: Dose Is Dose“. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology 54, s1 (01.06.2020): 45–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.2345/0899-8205-54.s3.45.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Abstract In the radiation sterilization arena, the question often arises as to whether radiation resistance of microorganisms might be affected by the energy level of the radiation source and the rate of the dose delivered (kGy/time). The basis for the question is if the microbial lethality is affected by the radiation energy level and/or the rate the dose is delivered, then the ability to transfer dose among different radiation sources could be challenged. This study addressed that question by performing a microbial inactivation study using two radiation sources (gamma and electron beam [E-beam]), two microbial challenges (natural product bioburden and biological indicators), and four dose rates delivered by three energy levels (1.17 MeV [gamma], 1.33 MeV [gamma], and 10 MeV [high-energy E-beam]). Based on analysis of the data, no significant differences were seen in the rate of microbial lethality across the range of radiation energies evaluated. In summary, as long as proof exists that the specified dose is delivered, dose is dose.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

2

Benova, K., P. Dvorak, D. Mate, M. Spalkova, J. Dolezalova und L. Kovarik. „Does the 1 Gy dose of gamma radiation impact the pork quality?“ Veterinární Medicína 66, No. 4 (02.04.2021): 140–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.17221/149/2020-vetmed.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

A nuclear accident (e.g., Fukushima), and, in particular, the transport of animals within a radiation-affected area can lead to a whole-body, or partial external irradiation, followed by oxidative stress, which could result in subsequent meat quality changes. In this experiment, live pigs were exposed to half-body irradiation by an external dose of 1.0 Gy. The caudal half of the animal’s body was irradiated. After their slaughter, samples from the muscle tissue of musculus semimembranosus and musculus longissimus lumborum et thoracis at the upper margin of musculus gluteus medius (irradiated body half) and at the 3<sup>rd</sup>–4<sup>th</sup> thoracic vertebra (non-irradiated half) were collected to determine the meat quality parameters. A significant difference (P < 0.05) was observed only in the meat colour parameter (a*) in the irradiated group of pigs. If there is no internal contamination, and the half-body exposure to the external radiation dose does not exceed 1 Gy, pigs from an irradiation-affected area may be used for human consumption.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

3

Haaga, John R. „Radiation Dose Management“. American Journal of Roentgenology 177, Nr. 2 (August 2001): 289–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/ajr.177.2.1770289.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

4

von Hippel, Frank. „Lethal Radiation Dose“. Science 230, Nr. 4729 (29.11.1985): 992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.230.4729.992.c.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

5

Dickson, D. „Radiation dose limits“. Science 238, Nr. 4832 (04.12.1987): 1349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.3685984.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

6

Goldman, M. „Chernobyl radiation dose“. Science 237, Nr. 4815 (07.08.1987): 575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.3603040.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

7

O’Doherty, Jim, und Pauline Negre. „Radiation dose monitoring“. Nuclear Medicine Communications 40, Nr. 12 (Dezember 2019): 1193–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/mnm.0000000000001094.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

8

Parmegiani, Lodovico, Graciela Estela Cognigni und Marco Filicori. „Ultraviolet radiation dose“. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 22, Nr. 5 (Mai 2011): 503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.12.010.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

9

HIPPEL, F. V. „Lethal Radiation Dose“. Science 230, Nr. 4729 (29.11.1985): 992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.230.4729.992-b.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

10

Lloyd, Ray D., Glenn N. Taylor und Scott C. Miller. „DOES LOW DOSE INTERNAL RADIATION INCREASE LIFESPAN?“ Health Physics 86, Nr. 6 (Juni 2004): 629–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004032-200406000-00009.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

11

Brady, Zoe. „Radiation dose in fluoroscopy: Experience does matter“. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 60, Nr. 4 (26.07.2016): 457–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.12485.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

12

Guo, Jia-jia, Ning Liu, Zheng Ma, Zi-jun Gong, Yue-lang Liang, Qi Cheng, Xin-guang Zhong und Zhen-jiang Yao. „Dose-Response Effects of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation on Blood Parameters in Industrial Irradiation Workers“. Dose-Response 20, Nr. 2 (April 2022): 155932582211056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15593258221105695.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

While previous studies have focused on the health effects of occupational exposure of radiations on medical radiation workers, few have analyzed the dose-response relationship between low radiation doses and changes in blood parameters. Even fewer studies have been conducted on industrial worker populations. Using a prospective cohort study design, this study collected health examination reports and personal dose monitoring data from 705 industrial irradiation workers who underwent regular physical examinations at Dongguan Sixth People’s Hospital. The dose-response effects of low-dose ionizing radiation on blood parameters were assessed using a generalized linear model and restricted cubic spline model. Red blood cell counts decreased then increased, before decreasing again with increasing ionizing radiation. This was in contrast to the curve of the total platelet count after irradiation. Additionally, a radiation dose of 2.904 mSv was the turning point for the nonlinear curve of hemoglobin count changes. In conclusion, long-term, low-dose ionizing radiation affects blood cell levels in industrial irradiation workers. There is a nonlinear dose-response relationship between red blood cell, platelet, and hemoglobin counts and the cumulative radiation dose. These findings should alert radiation workers to seek preventive medical treatment before the occurrence of any serious hematopoietic disease.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

13

Doss, Mohan. „Low Dose Radiation Adaptive Protection to Control Neurodegenerative Diseases“. Dose-Response 12, Nr. 2 (12.09.2013): dose—response.1. http://dx.doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.13-030.doss.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

14

Scott, Bobby R., und Jennifer Di Palma. „Sparsely Ionizing Diagnostic and Natural Background Radiations are Likely Preventing Cancer and other Genomic-Instability-Associated Diseases“. Dose-Response 5, Nr. 3 (01.07.2007): dose—response.0. http://dx.doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.06-002.scott.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Routine diagnostic X-rays (e.g., chest X-rays, mammograms, computed tomography scans) and routine diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures using sparsely ionizing radiation forms (e.g., beta and gamma radiations) stimulate the removal of precancerous neoplastically transformed and other genomically unstable cells from the body (medical radiation hormesis). The indicated radiation hormesis arises because radiation doses above an individual-specific stochastic threshold activate a system of cooperative protective processes that include high-fidelity DNA repair/apoptosis (presumed p53 related), an auxiliary apoptosis process (PAM process) that is presumed p53-independent, and stimulated immunity. These forms of induced protection are called adapted protection because they are associated with the radiation adaptive response. Diagnostic X-ray sources, other sources of sparsely ionizing radiation used in nuclear medicine diagnostic procedures, as well as radioisotope-labeled immunoglobulins could be used in conjunction with apoptosis-sensitizing agents (e.g., the natural phenolic compound resveratrol) in curing existing cancer via low-dose fractionated or low-dose, low-dose-rate therapy (therapeutic radiation hormesis). Evidence is provided to support the existence of both therapeutic (curing existing cancer) and medical (cancer prevention) radiation hormesis. Evidence is also provided demonstrating that exposure to environmental sparsely ionizing radiations, such as gamma rays, protect from cancer occurrence and the occurrence of other diseases via inducing adapted protection (environmental radiation hormesis).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

15

Doss, Mohan. „Shifting the Paradigm in Radiation Safety“. Dose-Response 10, Nr. 4 (10.02.2012): dose—response.1. http://dx.doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.11-056.doss.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

16

Fawcett, HowardH. „Radiation Dose: Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project“. Journal of Hazardous Materials 31, Nr. 1 (Juni 1992): 102–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3894(92)87058-n.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

17

Doss, Mohan. „Linear No-Threshold Model vs. Radiation Hormesis“. Dose-Response 11, Nr. 4 (24.05.2013): dose—response.1. http://dx.doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.13-005.doss.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

18

Park, Michael Yong, und Seung Eun Jung. „CT radiation dose and radiation reduction strategies“. Journal of the Korean Medical Association 54, Nr. 12 (2011): 1262. http://dx.doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2011.54.12.1262.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

19

Soufbaf, Mahmoud, und Zahra Abedi. „Does dose rate compensate low doses of gamma irradiation towards insect and mite pest sterilization?“ Radiation Physics and Chemistry 207 (Juni 2023): 110840. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2023.110840.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

20

Sutou, Shizuyo. „Low-dose radiation effects“. Current Opinion in Toxicology 30 (Juni 2022): 100329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cotox.2022.02.002.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

21

Rossi, Harald H. „Low-Dose Radiation Exposure“. Science 247, Nr. 4947 (09.03.1990): 1166–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.247.4947.1166.c.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

22

Park, Jeong Mi. „Mammographic Radiation Dose Measurement“. Journal of the Korean Radiological Society 41, Nr. 2 (1999): 413. http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/jkrs.1999.41.2.413.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

23

Baerlocher, M. O., S. Leung, M. Asch und A. Myers. „Radiation dose and protection“. Canadian Medical Association Journal 184, Nr. 4 (19.12.2011): E240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.090754.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

24

Dendy, P. P., und M. J. P. Brugmans. „Low dose radiation risks“. British Journal of Radiology 76, Nr. 910 (Oktober 2003): 674–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/62523154.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

25

Johansson, Karl-axel, Sören Mattsson, Anders Brahme, Jörgen Carlsson, Björn Zackrisson und Ingela Turesson. „Radiation Therapy Dose Delivery“. Acta Oncologica 42, Nr. 2 (01.01.2003): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02841860300675.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

26

Johansson, Karl-Axel, Sören Mattsson, Anders Brahme, Jörgen Carlsson, Björn Zackrisson und Ingela Turesson. „Radiation Therapy Dose Delivery“. Acta Oncologica 42, Nr. 2 (März 2003): 85–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02841860310004922.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

27

Kunkler, Ian. „Genomic-adjusted radiation dose“. Lancet Oncology 18, Nr. 3 (März 2017): e128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30090-6.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

28

Spratt, Daniel E., Daniel R. Wahl und Theodore S. Lawrence. „Genomic-adjusted radiation dose“. Lancet Oncology 18, Nr. 3 (März 2017): e127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30092-x.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

29

Little, John B. „Low-dose Radiation Effects“. Health Physics 59, Nr. 1 (Juli 1990): 49–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004032-199007000-00005.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

30

Zhou, Bo, Xiaobo Sharon Hu, Danny Z. Chen und Cedric X. Yu. „Accelerating radiation dose calculation“. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems 13, Nr. 1s (November 2013): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2536747.2536755.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

31

Miller, R., und R. Brent. „Low-dose radiation exposure“. Science 247, Nr. 4947 (09.03.1990): 1166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.2315688.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

32

Rothenberg, L. N., und K. S. Pentlow. „Radiation dose in CT.“ RadioGraphics 12, Nr. 6 (November 1992): 1225–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.12.6.1439023.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

33

Goei, R., und G. Kemerink. „Radiation dose in defecography.“ Radiology 176, Nr. 1 (Juli 1990): 137–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.176.1.2353082.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

34

Modan, Baruch. „Low-dose radiation carcinogenesis“. European Journal of Cancer 28, Nr. 6-7 (Mai 1992): 1010–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0959-8049(92)90442-5.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

35

Kelekis, A. D., H. Yilmaz, G. Abdo, J. B. Martin, J. M. Viera, D. A. R�fenacht, A. Mehdizade et al. „Radiation dose in vertebroplasty“. Neuroradiology 46, Nr. 3 (01.03.2004): 243–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-003-1156-0.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

36

Chintapalli, Kedar N., Richard S. Montgomery, Mustapha Hatab, Venkata S. Katabathina und Kenneth Guiy. „Radiation Dose Management: Part 1, Minimizing Radiation Dose in CT-Guided Procedures“. American Journal of Roentgenology 198, Nr. 4 (April 2012): W347—W351. http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/ajr.11.7958.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

37

Ahmed, K. A., Y. Kim, S. M. H. Naqvi, A. E. Berglund, E. Welsh, A. O. Naghavi, J. J. Caudell et al. „Utilizing the Genomically Adjusted Radiation Dose (GARD) to Model Radiation Dose Personalization“. International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics 102, Nr. 3 (November 2018): S136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.06.335.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

38

Johnston, James, Robert J. Comello, Beth L. Vealé und Jeff Killion. „Radiation Exposure Dose Trends and Radiation Dose Reduction Strategies in Medical Imaging“. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 41, Nr. 3 (September 2010): 137–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2010.06.003.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

39

Dixon, Adrian K., und Philip Dendy. „Spiral CT: how much does radiation dose matter?“ Lancet 352, Nr. 9134 (Oktober 1998): 1082–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)79751-8.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

40

Vieira Dias, Juliana, Celine Gloaguen, Dimitri Kereselidze, Line Manens, Karine Tack und Teni G. Ebrahimian. „Gamma Low-Dose-Rate Ionizing Radiation Stimulates Adaptive Functional and Molecular Response in Human Aortic Endothelial Cells in a Threshold-, Dose-, and Dose Rate–Dependent Manner“. Dose-Response 16, Nr. 1 (01.01.2018): 155932581875523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1559325818755238.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

A central question in radiation protection research is whether low-dose and low-dose-rate (LDR) exposures to ionizing radiation play a role in progression of cardiovascular disease. The response of endothelial cells to different LDR exposures may help estimate risk of cardiovascular disease by providing the biological mechanism involved. We investigated the effect of chronic LDR radiation on functional and molecular responses of human aorta endothelial cells (HAoECs). Human aorta endothelial cells were continuously irradiated at LDR (6 mGy/h) for 15 days and analyzed at time points when the cumulative dose reached 0.05, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 Gy. The same doses were administered acutely at high-dose rate (HDR; 1 Gy/min). The threshold for the loss of angiogenic capacity for both LDR and HDR radiations was between 0.5 and 1.0 Gy. At 2.0 Gy, angiogenic capacity returned to normal only for HAoEC exposed to LDR radiation, associated with increased expression of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory genes. Pre-LDR, but not pre-HDR, radiation, followed by a single acute 2.0 Gy challenge dose sustained the expression of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory genes and stimulated angiogenesis. Our results suggest that dose rate is important in cellular response and that a radioadaptive response is involved for a 2.0 Gy dose at LDR.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

41

Sarihan, Mucize, und Evrim Abamor. „Radiation dose measurement on bone scintigraphy and planning clinical management“. Open Physics 20, Nr. 1 (01.01.2022): 1176–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/phys-2022-0211.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Abstract Radiation has been used in a variety of different fields since its discovery. It is very important in medial sector for both diagnosis and also for treatment. In this study, the radiation dose rate emitted to the environment after radiopharmaceutical injection was determined using patients undergoing bone scintigraphy imaging. Radiation dose rate measurements were performed at different distances from the patient and at different levels of the patient. Measurements were done at different times to determine the relationship between radiation dose rate and time. The radiation dose rate emitted by the patient was measured after an average of 10.21, 42.36, and 76.28 min of injection. In order to see the relationship between radiation dose rate and distance, measurements were done at 25, 50, 100, and 200 cm distance from the patient. The measured average radiation dose rate at 1 m distance from the patients’ chest level and 10.21 min after radiopharmaceutical injection was 16.27 μSv h−1. Then, the average radiation dose rate decayed down to 13.65 μSv h−1 after 42.36 min, while the measured average radiation dose rate after 76.28 min was lower as 12.41 μSv h−1 at 100 cm from patient’s chest level.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

42

Fedorov, S. G., A. V. Berlyand und V. M. Dyachenko. „Ensuring the unity of measurements of the neutron radiation rate absorbed dose in the field of clinical neutron radiation dosimetry“. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2373, Nr. 2 (01.12.2022): 022046. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2373/2/022046.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Abstract Development of neutron radiation therapy arises the question of ensuring the uniformity of measurements of the absorbed dose and the absorbed dose rate of neutron radiation. FGUP “VNIIFTRI” improved the primary method and means of reproducing the unit of neutron radiation absorbed dose rate within the framework of improving the State primary standard of units of absorbed dose rate and neutron dose equivalent rate GET 117-2010. A set of ionization chambers has been created and the upper value of the reproduction of the unit of absorbed dose rate of neutron radiation has been expanded. A hardware-methodical complex has also been developed for transferring a unit of absorbed dose rate of neutron radiation to nuclear physics facilities used in neutron radiation therapy. As a result the expanded relative uncertainty of reproduction of the unit of absorbed dose rate does not exceed 3%, the expanded relative uncertainty of the transmission method does not exceed 0.5%. The resulting level of accuracy is in line with the recommendations used in neutron beam therapy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

43

Demaria, Sandra, Chandan Guha, Jonathan Schoenfeld, Zachary Morris, Arta Monjazeb, Andrew Sikora, Marka Crittenden et al. „Radiation dose and fraction in immunotherapy: one-size regimen does not fit all settings, so how does one choose?“ Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer 9, Nr. 4 (April 2021): e002038. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2020-002038.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Recent evidence indicates that ionizing radiation can enhance immune responses to tumors. Advances in radiation delivery techniques allow hypofractionated delivery of conformal radiotherapy. Hypofractionation or other modifications of standard fractionation may improve radiation’s ability to promote immune responses to tumors. Other novel delivery options may also affect immune responses, including T-cell activation and tumor-antigen presentation changes. However, there is limited understanding of the immunological impact of hypofractionated and unique multifractionated radiotherapy regimens, as these observations are relatively recent. Hence, these differences in radiotherapy fractionation result in distinct immune-modulatory effects. Radiation oncologists and immunologists convened a virtual consensus discussion to identify current deficiencies, challenges, pitfalls and critical gaps when combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy and making recommendations to the field and advise National Cancer Institute on new directions and initiatives that will help further development of these two fields.This commentary aims to raise the awareness of this complexity so that the need to study radiation dose, fractionation, type and volume is understood and valued by the immuno-oncology research community. Divergence of approaches and findings between preclinical studies and clinical trials highlights the need for evaluating the design of future clinical studies with particular emphasis on radiation dose and fractionation, immune biomarkers and selecting appropriate end points for combination radiation/immune modulator trials, recognizing that direct effect on the tumor and potential abscopal effect may well be different. Similarly, preclinical studies should be designed as much as possible to model the intended clinical setting. This article describes a conceptual framework for testing different radiation therapy regimens as separate models of how radiation itself functions as an immunomodulatory ‘drug’ to provide alternatives to the widely adopted ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategy of frequently used 8 Gy×3 regimens immunomodulation.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

44

Schiff, Peter B. „Dose dissonance in radiation oncology: Consensus needed when prescribing dose in radiation therapy“. Practical Radiation Oncology 7, Nr. 6 (November 2017): e579-e580. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2017.04.018.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

45

Scobioala, Sergiu, Ross Parfitt, Peter Matulat, Christopher Kittel, Fatemeh Ebrahimi, Heidi Wolters, Antoinette am Zehnhoff-Dinnesen und Hans Theodor Eich. „Impact of radiation technique, radiation fraction dose, and total cisplatin dose on hearing“. Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 193, Nr. 11 (08.09.2017): 910–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-017-1205-y.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

46

Logar, John R., und Emily Craven. „Radiation Process Control: Product Dose vs. Process Dose“. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology 54, s1 (01.06.2020): 53–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.2345/0899-8205-54.s3.53.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Abstract The requirements for the irradiation of healthcare products have been well established and implemented across the globe for several decades. The ISO 11137 series of standards gives the user the road map for designing a radiation process that will routinely deliver the required sterility assurance level so that product consistently meets specifications. The latest addition to the ISO 11137 series of standards should provide much-needed guidance around establishing a highly reproducible process based on a statistical analysis of the validated state of control. Most industries refer to this as “process control.”

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

47

Schimmerling, W., und F. A. Cucinotta. „Dose and dose rate effectiveness of space radiation“. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 122, Nr. 1-4 (01.12.2006): 349–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncl464.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

48

Abel, Julio, und Julio Abel. „Коэффициент эффективности (DDREF) дозы и мощноcти доз: ненужные, спорные и противоречивые вопросы“. Medical Radiology and radiation safety 62, Nr. 2 (13.04.2017): 13–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/article_58f0b957316ef3.36328519.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Purpose: The aim of the paper is to review the genesis and evolution of the concept termed dose and dose rate effectiveness factor or DDREF, to expose critiques on the concept and to suggest some curse of action on its use. Material and methods: Mainly using the UNSCEAR reporting and ICRP recommendations as the main reference material, the paper describes the evolution (since the 70’s) of the conundrum of inferring radiation risk at low dose and dose-rate. People are usually exposed to radiation at much lower doses and dose rates than those for which quantitative evaluations of incidence of radiation effects are available – a situation that tempted experts to search for a factor relating the epidemiological attribution of effects at high doses and dose-rates with the subjective inference of risk at low doses and dose-rates. The formal introduction and mathematical formulation of the concept by UNSCEAR and ICRP (in the 90’s), is recalled. It is then underlined that the latest UNSCEAR radiation risk estimates did not use a DDREF concept, making it de facto unneeded for purposes of radiation risk attribution. The paper also summarizes the continuous use of the concept for radiation protection purposes and related concerns as well as some current public misunderstandings and apprehension on the DDREF (particularly the aftermath of the Fukushima Dai’ichi NPP accident). It finally discusses epistemological weaknesses of the concept itself. Results: It seems that the DDREF has become superseded by scientific developments and its use has turned out to be unneeded for the purposes of radiation risk estimates. The concept also appears to be arguable for radiation protection purposes, visibly controversial and epistemologically questionable Conclusions: It is suggested that: (i) the use of the DDREF can be definitely abandoned for radiation risk estimates; (ii) while recognizing that radiation protection has different purposes than radiation risk estimation, the discontinuation of using a DDREF for radiation protection might also be considered; (iii) for radiation exposure situations for which there are available epidemiological information that can be scientifically tested (namely which is confirmable and verifiable and therefore falsifiable), radiation risks should continue to be attributed in terms of frequentistic probabilities; and, (iv) for radiation exposure situations for which direct scientific evidence of effects is unavailable or unfeasible to obtain, radiation risks may need to be inferred on the basis of indirect evidence, scientific reasoning and professional judgment aimed at estimating their plausibility in terms of subjective probabilities.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

49

Djurovic, Branka, Branislav Djurovic und Vesna Spasic-Jokic. „Professional exposure to ionizing radiation and the occurrence of cataract“. Vojnosanitetski pregled 61, Nr. 4 (2004): 387–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/vsp0404387d.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Radiation cataract is one of ensuing effects of ionizing radiation, since its threshold dose under which it does not occur, and above which it shows dose dependency, has been observed. Clinical course of radiation cataract is identical for all the types of ionizing radiation and is very typical. Minimal dose for progressive cataract formation is determined by the type of radiation, i.e., its relative biological efficacy, dose, and the duration of the exposure period. Theoretically, threshold dose existence does not exclude the incidence of cataract formation under significantly smaller doses, as well. The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence of cataract formation among the medical staff professionally exposed to ionizing radiation. Neither of the diagnosed cataracts had typical morphology, nor was the correlation established between the dose, exposure time, and the cataract formation. All the diagnosed cataracts were described as premature, and therefore ionizing radiation was considered as a co-factor in premature cataract formation in the examined groups.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

50

Damanik, Martua, Josepa ND Simanjuntak und Elvita Rahmi Daulay. „Studi Paparan Radiasi pada Pekerja Radiasi Cathlab dengan Menggunakan My Dose Mini sebagai Upaya Keselamatan Radiasi di RSUP Adam Malik Medan“. Jurnal Pengawasan Tenaga Nuklir 1, Nr. 1 (26.07.2021): 41–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.53862/jupeten.v1i1.009.

Der volle Inhalt der Quelle

Annotation:

Cathlab radiation workers, when performing interventional procedures, are at high risk of the effects of radiation exposure. The risk of radiation exposure is deterministic and stochastic biological effects. Therefore, radiation exposure studies of radiation workers at the cath lab were conducted to determine the value of radiation exposure received. This radiation exposure study was conducted by measuring and recording radiation exposure doses received by radiation workers. Measurements are made when the radiation officer performs the intervention procedure. The research was carried out for one month in the cath lab room of the Adam Malik General Hospital, Medan. The modalities used are GE Medical System Interventional Fluoroscopy and Phillips Allura Xper FD20. The dosimeter used is “my dose mini”, which is placed inside a shield or apron worn by radiation workers. The size of the apron shield used is 0.50 mm Pb at the front and 0.25 mm Pb at the rear. Radiation officers whose radiation exposure dose was measured consisted of 10 doctors, 11 nurses, and one radiographer. Each inspection procedure of each radiation worker has a different distance, time, and shield from the radiation source. The measurement of radiation exposure dose is (1-59 μSv) for doctors, (1-58 μSv) for nurses, and 1 μSv for radiographers. To protect against radiation must pay attention to the factors of time, distance, and shielding. Ways that can do are to avoid being close to radiation sources for too long, keep a space at a safe level from radiation, and use shields such as Pb-coated aprons, use Pb gloves, Pb goggles, and thyroid protectors. The amount of radiation exposure dose received by each radiation worker at the time of measurement is still within the tolerance limit. The Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency (BAPETEN) regulation, which the International Commission recommends on Radiological Protection (ICRP), is 20 mSv/year. The results of this study are expected to be used as input for improving the quality of service for monitoring radiation exposure doses in the Cathlab and as reference material for further research.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen

Wir bieten Rabatte auf alle Premium-Pläne für Autoren, deren Werke in thematische Literatursammlungen aufgenommen wurden. Kontaktieren Sie uns, um einen einzigartigen Promo-Code zu erhalten!