Radiation Adverse Outcome pathways (AOPs): examining priority questions from an international horizon-style exercise.

PURPOSE: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) Development Programme is being explored in the radiation field, as an overarching framework to identify and prioritize research needs that best support strengthening of radiation risk assessment and risk management strategies. To advance the use of AOPs, an international horizon-style exercise (HSE) was initiated through the Radiation/Chemical AOP Joint Topical Group (JTG) formed by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) High-Level Group on Low Dose Research (HLG-LDR) under the auspices of the Committee on Radiological Protection and Public Health (CRPPH). The intent of the HSE was to identify key research questions for consideration in AOP development that would help to reduce uncertainties in estimating the health risks following exposures to low dose and low dose-rate ionizing radiation. The HSE was conducted in several phases involving the solicitation of relevant questions, a collaborative review of open-ended candidate questions and an elimination exercise that led to the selection of 25 highest priority questions for the stated purpose. These questions were further ranked by over 100 respondents through an international survey. This final set of questions was judged to provide insights into how the OECD's AOP approach can be put into practice to meet the needs of hazard and risk assessors, regulators, and researchers. This paper examines the 25 priority questions in the context of hazard/risk assessment framework for ionizing radiation. CONCLUSION: By addressing the 25 priority questions, it is anticipated that constructed AOPs will have a high level of specificity, making them valuable tools for simplifying and prioritizing complex biological processes for use in developing revised radiation hazard and risk assessment strategies.

Application of the Cytokinesis-Block Micronucleus Assay for High-Dose Exposures Using Imaging Flow Cytometry.

The cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay is a well-established method to assess radiation-induced genetic damage in human cells. This assay has been adapted to imaging flow cytometry (IFC), allowing automated analysis of many cells, and eliminating the need to create microscope slides. Furthermore, to improve the efficiency of assay performance, a small-volume method previously developed was employed. Irradiated human blood samples were cultured, stained, and analyzed by IFC to produce images of the cells. Samples were run using both manual and 96-well plate automated acquisition. Multiple parameter-based image features were collected for each sample, and the results were compared to confirm that these acquisition methods are functionally identical. This paper details the multi-parametric analysis developed and the resulting calibration curves up to 10 Gy. The calibration curves were created using a quadratic random coefficient model with Poisson errors, as well as a logistic discriminant function. The curves were then validated with blinded, irradiated samples, using relative bias and relative mean square error. Overall, the accuracy of the dose estimates was adequate for triage dosimetry (within 1 Gy of the true dose) over 90% of the time for lower doses and about half the time for higher doses, with the lowest success rate between 5 and 6 Gy where the calibration curve reached its peak and there was the smallest change in MN/BNC with dose. This work describes the application of a novel multi-parametric analysis that fits the calibration curves and allows dose estimates up to 10 Gy, which were previously limited to 4 Gy. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the results from samples acquired manually and with the autosampler are functionally similar.

Considerations for application of benchmark dose modeling in radiation research: workshop highlights.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to different forms of ionizing radiation occurs in diverse occupational, medical, and environmental settings. Improving the accuracy of the estimated health risks associated with exposure is therefore, essential for protecting the public, particularly as it relates to chronic low dose exposures. A key aspect to understanding health risks is precise and accurate modeling of the dose-response relationship. Toward this vision, benchmark dose (BMD) modeling may be a suitable approach for consideration in the radiation field. BMD modeling is already extensively used for chemical hazard assessments and is considered statistically preferable to identifying low and no observed adverse effects levels. BMD modeling involves fitting mathematical models to dose-response data for a relevant biological endpoint and identifying a point of departure (the BMD, or its lower bound). Recent examples in chemical toxicology show that when applied to molecular endpoints (e.g. genotoxic and transcriptional endpoints), BMDs correlate to points of departure for more apical endpoints such as phenotypic changes (e.g. adverse effects) of interest to regulatory decisions. This use of BMD modeling may be valuable to explore in the radiation field, specifically in combination with adverse outcome pathways, and may facilitate better interpretation of relevant in vivo and in vitro dose-response data. To advance this application, a workshop was organized on June 3rd, 2022, in Ottawa, Ontario that brought together BMD experts in chemical toxicology and the radiation scientific community of researchers, regulators, and policy-makers. The workshop's objective was to introduce radiation scientists to BMD modeling and its practical application using case examples from the chemical toxicity field and demonstrate the BMDExpress software using a radiation dataset. Discussions focused on the BMD approach, the importance of experimental design, regulatory applications, its use in supporting the development of adverse outcome pathways, and specific radiation-relevant examples. CONCLUSIONS: Although further deliberations are needed to advance the use of BMD modeling in the radiation field, these initial discussions and partnerships highlight some key steps to guide future undertakings related to new experimental work.

Radiation adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) are on the horizon: advancing radiation protection through an international Horizon-Style exercise.

PURPOSE: The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework, a systematic tool that can link available mechanistic data with phenotypic outcomes of relevance to regulatory decision-making, is being explored in areas related to radiation risk assessment. To examine the challenges including the use of AOPs to support the radiation protection community, an international horizon-style exercise was initiated through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Nuclear Energy Agency High-Level Group on Low Dose Research Radiation/Chemical AOP Joint Topical Group. The objective of the HSE was to facilitate the collection of ideas from a range of experts, to short-list a set of priority research questions that could, if answered, improve the description of the radiation dose-response relationship for low dose/dose-rate exposures, as well as reduce uncertainties in estimating the risk of developing adverse health outcomes following such exposures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The HSE was guided by an international steering committee of radiation risk experts. In the first phase, research questions were solicited on areas that can be supported by the AOP framework, or challenges on the use of AOPs in radiation risk assessment. In the second phase, questions received were refined and sorted by the SC using a best-worst scaling method. During a virtual 3-day workshop, the list of questions was further narrowed. In the third phase, an international survey of the broader radiation protection community led to an orderly ranking of the top questions. RESULTS: Of the 271 questions solicited, 254 were accepted and categorized into 9 themes. These were further refined to the top 25 prioritized questions. Among these, the higher ranked questions will be considered as 'important' to drive future initiatives in the low dose radiation protection community. These included questions on the ability of AOPs to delineate responses across different levels of biological organization, and how AOPs could be applied to address research questions on radiation quality, doses or dose-rates, exposure time patterns and deliveries, and uncertainties in low dose/dose-rate effects. A better understanding of these concepts is required to support the use of the AOP framework in radiation risk assessment. CONCLUSION: Through dissemination of these results and considerations on next steps, the JTG will address select priority questions to advance the development and use of AOPs in the radiation protection community. The major themes observed will be discussed in the context of their relevance to areas of research that support the system of radiation protection.

Radiation Biology and Its Role in the Canadian Radiation Protection Framework.

The linear no-threshold (linear-non-threshold) model is a dose-response model that has long served as the foundation of the international radiation protection framework, which includes the Canadian regulatory framework. Its purpose is to inform the choice of appropriate dose limits and subsequent as low as reasonably achievable requirements, social and economic factors taken into account. The linear no-threshold model assumes that the risk of developing cancer increases proportionately with increasing radiation dose. The linear no-threshold model has historically been applied by extrapolating the risk of cancer at high doses (>1,000 mSv) down to low doses in a linear manner. As the health effects of radiation exposure at low doses remain ambiguous, reducing uncertainties found in cancer risk dose-response models can be achieved through in vitro and animal-based studies. The purpose of this critical review is to analyze whether the linear no-threshold model is still applicable for use by modern nuclear regulators for radiation protection purposes, or if there is sufficient scientific evidence supporting an alternate model from which to derive regulatory dose limits.

Non-targeted effects and radiation-induced carcinogenesis: a review.

Exposure to ionising radiation is clearly associated with an increased risk of developing some types of cancer. However, the contribution of non-targeted effects to cancer development after exposure to ionising radiation is far less clear. The currently used cancer risk model by the international radiation protection community states that any increase in radiation exposure proportionately increases the risk of developing cancer. However, this stochastic cancer risk model does not take into account any contribution from non-targeted effects. Nor does it consider the possibility of a bystander mechanism in the induction of genomic instability. This paper reviews the available evidence to date for a possible role for non-targeted effects to contribute to cancer development after exposure to ionising radiation. An evolution in the understanding of the mechanisms driving non-targeted effects after exposure to ionising radiation is critical to determine the true contribution of non-targeted effects on the risk of developing cancer. Such an evolution will likely only be achievable through coordinated multidisciplinary teams combining several fields of study including: genomics, proteomics, cell biology, molecular epidemiology, and traditional epidemiology.