Manuel Higueras - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Related Authors
University of Divinity
Uploads
Papers by Manuel Higueras
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts, 2021
International Journal of Radiation Biology, 2019
Comparative study of Micronucleus assays and Dicentric plus ring chromosomes for dose assessment ... more Comparative study of Micronucleus assays and Dicentric plus ring chromosomes for dose assessment in particular cases of partial-body exposure ABSTRACT Purpose: The goal was to compare the micronucleus (MN) and dicentric plus ring chromosomes (D+R) assays for dose assessment in cases of partial body irradiations (PBI). Materials and methods: We constructed calibration curves for each assay at doses ranging from 0 to 5 Gy. In order to simulate partial-body exposures, blood samples from two donors were irradiated with 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 Gy and the ratios of irradiated to unirradiated blood were 25, 50, and 100%. Different tests were used to confirm if all samples were overdispersed or zero-inflated and for partial-body dose assessment we used the Qdr, Dolphin and Bayesian model. Results: In our samples for D+R calibration curve, practically all doses agreed with Poisson assumption, but MN exhibited cellular distributions that tend to be overdispersed and zero-inflated. The exact Poisson tests and zero-inflated tests demonstrate that virtually all samples of D+R from PBI simulation fit the Poisson distribution and were not zero-inflated, but almost all doses from MN samples were overdispersed and zero-inflated. In the partial-body estimation, when Qdr and Dolphin methods were used the results from dicentrics were better than MN, but in our samples from D+R and MN the dose estimation defined by the Bayesian methodology were more accurate than the classically methods used in biodosimetry. Conclusions: Dicentric chromosomes continue to prove to be the best biological marker for dose assessment. However exposure scenarios of partial-body estimation, overdispersion and zero-inflation may not occur, it being a critical point not only for dose assessment, but also to confirm partial-body exposure. MN could be used as alternative assays for partial-body dose estimation, but only in case when we have sure about the accident.
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts
ISEE Conference Abstracts, 2021
International Journal of Radiation Biology, 2019
Comparative study of Micronucleus assays and Dicentric plus ring chromosomes for dose assessment ... more Comparative study of Micronucleus assays and Dicentric plus ring chromosomes for dose assessment in particular cases of partial-body exposure ABSTRACT Purpose: The goal was to compare the micronucleus (MN) and dicentric plus ring chromosomes (D+R) assays for dose assessment in cases of partial body irradiations (PBI). Materials and methods: We constructed calibration curves for each assay at doses ranging from 0 to 5 Gy. In order to simulate partial-body exposures, blood samples from two donors were irradiated with 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 Gy and the ratios of irradiated to unirradiated blood were 25, 50, and 100%. Different tests were used to confirm if all samples were overdispersed or zero-inflated and for partial-body dose assessment we used the Qdr, Dolphin and Bayesian model. Results: In our samples for D+R calibration curve, practically all doses agreed with Poisson assumption, but MN exhibited cellular distributions that tend to be overdispersed and zero-inflated. The exact Poisson tests and zero-inflated tests demonstrate that virtually all samples of D+R from PBI simulation fit the Poisson distribution and were not zero-inflated, but almost all doses from MN samples were overdispersed and zero-inflated. In the partial-body estimation, when Qdr and Dolphin methods were used the results from dicentrics were better than MN, but in our samples from D+R and MN the dose estimation defined by the Bayesian methodology were more accurate than the classically methods used in biodosimetry. Conclusions: Dicentric chromosomes continue to prove to be the best biological marker for dose assessment. However exposure scenarios of partial-body estimation, overdispersion and zero-inflation may not occur, it being a critical point not only for dose assessment, but also to confirm partial-body exposure. MN could be used as alternative assays for partial-body dose estimation, but only in case when we have sure about the accident.