High LET radiation carcinogenesis
Open accessAbstract
The dose-response curves for the induction of tumors by high-LET radiation are complex and are insufficiently understood. There is no model or formulation to describe the dose-response relationship over a range 0-100 rad. Evidence suggests that at doses below 20 rad the response is linear, at least for life shortening and some tumor systems. Thus limiting values of RBEs for the induction of cancer in various tissues can be determined, but it will require sufficient data obtained at low single doses or with small fractions. The results obtained from experiments with heavy ions indicate an initial linear response with a plateauing of the curve at a tumor incidence level that is dependent on the type of tissue. The RBE values for the heavy ions using 60Co gamma rays as the reference radiation increase with the estimated LET from 4 or 4H to about 27 for 56Fe and 40Ar. The dose responses and RBEs for 56Fe and 40Ar are similar to those for fission neutrons. These findings suggest the possibility that the effectiveness for tumor induction reaches a maximum.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In Harderian gland tumors in B6CF1 female mice, the dose response for Fe particles was qualitatively different from γ-rays.
“Harderian Gland Tumors in B6CF1 female mice (Chang et al., 2016;Fry et al., 1985;Alpen et al., 1993) Dose response for Fe particles was qualitatively different from γ-rays.”
From A proposed change to astronaut exposures limits is a giant leap backwards for radiation protection (2021) · cites this paper as Fry et al., 1985
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 120
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- J. J. BROERSE and G. B. GERBER (Eds.) Neutron Careinogenesis Commission of the European Communities. EUR 8084EN Luxenbourg (198k).
- W. K. SINCLAIR, Fifty years of neutrons in biology and medicine. The comparative effects of neutrons in biological systems. In Proceedings o£ the 8th Symposium on Mierodosimetry (J. Booz and H. G. Ebert, Eds.), pp. 1-37. Co mission of the European Communities Eur-8395 (1952).
- 6_. G. J. NEARY, R. J. MCTNSON, and R. H. MOLE, Chronic Radiation Hazards. Pergamon Press, New York (1957).
- JJL. E. J. AINSWORTH, R. J. M. PRY, F. S. WILLIAMSON, P. C. BRENNAN, S. P. STEARNER, V. V. YANG, D. A. CROUSE, J. H. RUST, and T. B. BORAK, Dose effect relationships for life shortening tumorigenesis and systemic injuries in mice irradiated with fission neutron or Co gamma radiation. Proceedings of IRPA IVth Int. Congress, pp. 1143- 1151 (1977).
- H. H. VOGEL, JR., and H. W. DICKSON, Mammary neoplasia in Sprague-Dawley rats following acute and protracted irradiation. In Neutron Carelno- genesis. (Eds. J. J. Broerse and G. B. Gerber). EUR Report 8084 EN pp. 135-154 (1982). ,
- C. W. MAYS, and H. SPIESS, Bone sarcomas in patients given Radium-224. In: Radiation Careinogenesis: Epidemiology and Biological Significance Eds. J. D. Boiee, Jr. and J. F. Fraumeni, Jr. pp. 241-252. Raven Press (1984).
- H. C. Pirucello and C. A. Tobias, pp. 223-235. LBL-11220 (1981).
- Authors
- Fry, R. J. M., Powers-Risius, P., Alpen, E. L., & Ainsworth, E. J.
- ORCID
- Fry, R. J. M.
- Venue
- Radiation Research
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1985-11
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- S188
- ISSN
- 0033-7587 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2041512913
- Cited by
- 120
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 7.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Radiation Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) (submittedVersion)
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
- Keywords
- high-LET radiation, radiation-induced cancer, dose-response relationship, relative biological effectiveness, heavy ions, linear-quadratic model, low-dose radiation, fission neutrons, 56Fe, 40Ar, 60Co gamma rays, lifespan reduction
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation, Energy Transfer, Ions, Mice, Inbred Strains, Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced, Radiation Dosage, Relative Biological Effectiveness, Risk, Mice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
