MPS dose reconstruction for internal emitters: some site-specific issues and approaches. (3rd April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Leggett, Richard W.; Eckerman, Keith F.; Bellamy, Michael
• Is Part Of: International journal of radiation biology. Volume 98:Number 4(2022)
• Page Start: 631
• Page End: 643
• Publication Date: 2022-04-03
• Subjects: Dose reconstruction -- uranium -- plutonium -- polonium; Radiation -- Physiological effect -- Periodicals; Radiobiology -- Periodicals; 571.45
• DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2018.1558302
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0955-3002

Abstract

Abstract: Background: As part of the Million Person Study (MPS), dose reconstructions for internal emitters have been performed for several U.S. facilities where large quantities of radionuclides were handled. The main challenges and dominant sources of potential error in retrospective dose estimates for internally exposed workers have been found to vary from site to site. This article discusses some important issues encountered in dose reconstructions performed for selected MPS sites and the approaches used to address those issues. The focus is on some foundational components of retrospective dose assessments that have received little attention in the literature. Methods: The discussion is built around illustrative exposure data and dose reconstructions for workers at selected facilities addressed in the MPS. Related findings at some non-MPS sites are also discussed. Results: Each of the following items has been found to be a major source of potential error in reconstructed tissue doses for some MPS sites: identification of all dosimetrically important internal emitters; the time pattern of intake; the mode(s) of intake; reliability of bioassay measurements; application of surrogate (coworker) information in lieu of, or in conjunction with, worker-specific monitoring data; the chemical and physical forms of inhaled radionuclides; and the relation of air monitoring data to actual intake. Conclusions: (1) Much of the dose reconstruction effort for internal emitters should be devoted to development of best feasible exposure scenarios. (2) Coworker data should be used to assign exposure scenarios or dose estimates to workers with missing exposure data only if there is compelling evidence of similar coworker exposure. (3) Bioassay data for some radionuclides and periods of operation at MPS sites are of questionable reliability due to sizable uncertainties associated with contamination, recovery, or background issues. (4) Dose estimates derived solely from air monitoring data should be treated as highly uncertain values in the absence of site-specific information demonstrating that the data are reasonably predictive of intake. (5) For intakes known or assumed to be via inhalation, the uncertainty in lung dose typically is much greater than the uncertainty in dose to systemic tissues, when dose estimates are based on urinary excretion data. (6) The lung dose estimate often can be improved through development of site-specific respiratory absorption parameter values. (7) There is generally insufficient site-specific information to justify development of site-specific systemic models.