The relative biological effectiveness of high-energy clinical 3 and 6 MV X-rays for micronucleus induction in human lymphocytes. (4th May 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tamizh Selvan, G.; Kanagaraj, Karthik; Venkatachalam, Perumal
• Is Part Of: International journal of radiation biology. Volume 97:Number 5(2021)
• Page Start: 687
• Page End: 694
• Publication Date: 2021-05-04
• Subjects: Micronucleus -- blood lymphocytes -- dose estimation and relative biological effectiveness; Radiation -- Physiological effect -- Periodicals; Radiobiology -- Periodicals; 571.45
• DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2021.1906972
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0955-3002

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: In the modern era of radiotherapy, use of conventional radiation modalities (based on γ-rays) is being replaced by high-energy linear accelerator-based X-rays. As a result of mishandling of equipment or mechanical errors, health workers can be exposed to these high-energy X-rays. Especially in the absence of personnel monitoring devices, biodosimetry with a lower energy X-ray calibration curve may not provide an acceptable dose estimate. Moreover, the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) value assigned for X-rays is the same (ONE) regardless of beam energy (V), employed in diagnosis, interventional medicine, and radiotherapy. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to examine the induced biological effects, measured through micronucleus (MN) formation, of X-rays of different energies (3 and 6 MV X-rays), and to investigate the RBE relative to 225 kVp X-rays. Materials and methods: Peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) from healthy donors ( n = 6), were irradiated with 225 kVp, 3 MV, and 6 MV energy X-rays and induced biological damage was quantified as MN formation using the cytokinesis blocked MN (CBMN) assay. Results: The MN per cell in the X-irradiated samples for the three different X-ray energies showed a significant ( p <.0001) dose-dependent increase, when compared to unexposed samples. Aberration frequencies obtained at the same dose for the three different energies showed significant ( p <.05) difference for the MN per cell among the energy levels; however, the in vitro dose–response curve parameters (slope, intercept, and coefficient) did not show any significant differences. The estimated dose in the blinded sample was within the 95% confidence intervals of each of the calibration curves. However, overall, the 6 MV dose–response curve coefficients yielded the closest dose estimate to that of the true dose. The calculated RBE values at 5% induced MN for 3 and 6 MV LINAC X-rays were 2.0 ± 0.04 and 0.70 ± 0.01, respectively, and the average RBE for the complete dose–response curves were 1.13 ± 0.04 and 0.80 ± 0.02 relative to 225 kVp X-rays as standard radiation. Conclusion: The established dose–response curves obtained for PBL exposed to different energy levels of X-rays of 225 kVp, 3 MV, and 6 MV are ready to use for biological dosimetry purposes. The calculated RBE values for the higher energies of X-rays relative to 225 kVp X-rays in this study suggest that RBE of X-rays may not be equal to one, with the true value dependent on the beam energy, the dose and dose rate, and the endpoint investigated.