First global consensus for evidence-based management of the hematopoietic syndrome resulting from exposure to ionizing radiation.

OBJECTIVE: Hematopoietic syndrome (HS) is a clinical diagnosis assigned to people who present with ≥ 1 new-onset cytopenias in the setting of acute radiation exposure. The World Health Organization convened a panel of experts to evaluate the evidence and develop recommendations for medical countermeasures for the management of HS in a hypothetical scenario involving the hospitalization of 100 to 200 individuals exposed to radiation. The objective of this consultancy was to develop recommendations for treatment of the HS based upon the quality of evidence. METHODS: English-language articles were identified in MEDLINE and PubMed. Reference lists of retrieved articles were distributed to panel members before the meeting and updated during the meeting. Published case series and case reports of individuals with HS, published randomized controlled trials of relevant interventions used to treat nonirradiated individuals, reports of studies in irradiated animals, and prior recommendations of subject matter experts were selected. Studies were extracted using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. In cases in which data were limited or incomplete, a narrative review of the observations was made. No randomized controlled trials of medical countermeasures have been completed for individuals with radiation-associated HS. The use of GRADE analysis of countermeasures for injury to hematopoietic tissue was restricted by the lack of comparator groups in humans. Reliance on data generated in nonirradiated humans and experimental animals was necessary. RESULTS: Based upon GRADE analysis and narrative review, a strong recommendation was made for the administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor or granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor and a weak recommendation was made for the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of therapeutic interventions for HS in humans exposed to nontherapeutic radiation is difficult because of the limits of the evidence.

Literature review and global consensus on management of acute radiation syndrome affecting nonhematopoietic organ systems.

OBJECTIVES: The World Health Organization convened a panel of experts to rank the evidence for medical countermeasures for management of acute radiation syndrome (ARS) in a hypothetical scenario involving the hospitalization of 100 to 200 victims. The goal of this panel was to achieve consensus on optimal management of ARS affecting nonhematopoietic organ systems based upon evidence in the published literature. METHODS: English-language articles were identified in MEDLINE and PubMed. Reference lists of retrieved articles were distributed to conferees in advance of and updated during the meeting. Published case series and case reports of ARS, publications of randomized controlled trials of relevant interventions used to treat nonirradiated individuals, reports of studies in irradiated animals, and prior recommendations of subject matter experts were selected. Studies were extracted using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation system. In cases in which data were limited or incomplete, a narrative review of the observations was made. RESULTS: No randomized controlled trials of medical countermeasures have been completed for individuals with ARS. Reports of countermeasures were often incompletely described, making it necessary to rely on data generated in nonirradiated humans and in experimental animals. A strong recommendation is made for the administration of a serotonin-receptor antagonist prophylactically when the suspected exposure is >2 Gy and topical steroids, antibiotics, and antihistamines for radiation burns, ulcers, or blisters; excision and grafting of radiation ulcers or necrosis with intractable pain; provision of supportive care to individuals with neurovascular syndrome; and administration of electrolyte replacement therapy and sedatives to individuals with significant burns, hypovolemia, and/or shock. A strong recommendation is made against the use of systemic steroids in the absence of a specific indication. A weak recommendation is made for the use of fluoroquinolones, bowel decontamination, loperamide, and enteral nutrition, and for selective oropharyngeal/digestive decontamination, blood glucose maintenance, and stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality studies of therapeutic interventions in humans exposed to nontherapeutic radiation are not available, and because of ethical concerns regarding the conduct of controlled studies in humans, such studies are unlikely to emerge in the near future.

Biological dosimetry by the triage dicentric chromosome assay: potential implications for treatment of acute radiation syndrome in radiological mass casualties.

Biological dosimetry is an essential tool for estimating radiation dose. The dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) is currently the tool of choice. Because the assay is labor-intensive and time-consuming, strategies are needed to increase throughput for use in radiation mass casualty incidents. One such strategy is to truncate metaphase spread analysis for triage dose estimates by scoring 50 or fewer metaphases, compared to a routine analysis of 500 to 1000 metaphases, and to increase throughput using a large group of scorers in a biodosimetry network. Previously, the National Institutes for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute (AFRRI) sponsored a double-blinded interlaboratory comparison among five established international cytogenetic biodosimetry laboratories to determine the variability in calibration curves and in dose measurements in unknown, irradiated samples. In the present study, we further analyzed the published data from this previous study to investigate how the number of metaphase spreads influences dose prediction accuracy and how this information could be of value in the triage and management of people at risk for the acute radiation syndrome (ARS). Although, as expected, accuracy decreased with lower numbers of metaphase spreads analyzed, predicted doses by the laboratories were in good agreement and were judged to be adequate to guide diagnosis and treatment of ARS. These results demonstrate that for rapid triage, a network of cytogenetic biodosimetry laboratories can accurately assess doses even with a lower number of scored metaphases.

Biodosimetry Assessment Tool (BAT) software-dose prediction algorithms.

PURPOSE: Medical management of suspected radiation casualties requires use of multiparameter biodosimetry because no single biodosimetric measurement is sufficiently robust. This report describes the design and algorithms used in a radiation exposure assessment software application that serves as a diagnostic utility for triage and medical treatment formulation, as well as to convey psychological reassurance, for early-phase assessment of radiation exposures, and for surge response assessment for mass radiological casualties. METHODS: The Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute's Biological Dosimetry Research Program developed the integrated multiparameter Biodosimetry Assessment Tool computer program using Microsoft Visual Basic 6 with various second party plug-ins and add-ons. Dose-predicting algorithms were adopted by analyzing data from merged databases of human radiation exposure incidents and normal controls (non-irradiated) volunteers. The results are summarized in user-friendly screens. SUMMARY: BAT algorithms are presented and compared to other previously published dose assessment algorithms based on biological indicators (i.e., onset of vomiting, lymphocyte depletion kinetics). These new algorithms are incorporated into a computer-based program that assists responders and medical providers in recording relevant diagnostic information and assessing significant radiation exposures. It promotes early-phase (<10 d) data collection after a radiation exposure incident and provides data templates for entry of diagnostic information using multiparameter indices. It allows for recording of relevant clinical information and summarizes diagnostic information such as estimated multiparameter doses. Data can be printed and archived in accordance with civilian and military guidelines.

Synopsis of partial-body radiation diagnostic biomarkers and medical management of radiation injury workshop.

Radiation exposures from accidents, nuclear detonations or terrorist incidents are unlikely to be homogeneous; however, current biodosimetric approaches are developed and validated primarily in whole-body irradiation models. A workshop was held at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in May 2008 to draw attention to the need for partial-body biodosimetry, to discuss current knowledge, and to identify the gaps to be filled. A panel of international experts and the workshop attendees discussed the requirements and concepts for a path forward. This report addresses eight key areas identified by the Workshop Program Committee for future focus: (1) improved cytogenetics, (2) clinical signs and symptoms, (3) cutaneous bioindicators, (4) organ-specific biomarkers, (5) biophysical markers of dose, (6) integrated diagnostic approaches, (7) confounding factors, and (8) requirements for post-event medical follow-up. For each area, the status, advantages and limitations of existing approaches and suggestions for new directions are presented.

WHO 1st consultation on the development of a global biodosimetry laboratories network for radiation emergencies (BioDoseNet).

The World Health Organization (WHO) held a consultation meeting at WHO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland, December 17-18, 2007, to develop the framework for a global biodosimetry network. The WHO network is envisioned to enable dose assessment using multiple methods [cytogenetics, electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), radionuclide bioassays, etc.]; however, the initial discussion focused on the cytogenetic bioassay (i.e., metaphase-spread dicentric assay). Few regional cytogenetic biodosimetry networks have been established so far. The roles and resources available from United Nations (UN) agencies that provide international cooperation in biological dosimetry after radiological emergencies were reviewed. In addition, extensive reliance on the use of the relevant International Standards Organization (ISO) standards was emphasized. The results of a WHO survey of global cytogenetic biological dosimetry capability were reported, and while the survey indicates robust global capability, there was also a clear lack of global leadership and coordination. The expert group, which had a concentrated focus on cytogenetic biodosimetry, formulated the general scope and concept of operations for the development of a WHO global biodosimetry laboratory network for radiation emergencies (BioDoseNet). Follow-on meetings are planned to further develop technical details for this network.