RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2017: limits and pitfalls of ILCs. - Inria - Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique Accéder directement au contenu
Article Dans Une Revue International Journal of Radiation Biology Année : 2021

RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2017: limits and pitfalls of ILCs.

1 IRSN/PSE-SANTE/SERAMED/LRAcc - Laboratoire de Radiobiologie des expositions accidentelles
2 Faculté de Biosciences
3 IRSN/PSE-SANTE/SERAMED/LRMed - Laboratoire de Radiobiologie des expositions médicales
4 Universität Ulm - Ulm University [Ulm, Allemagne]
5 ORISE - Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
6 iThemba LABS [National Research Foundation]
7 AFRRI - Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute, Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences,
8 University of Sevilla,
9 Center of Biotechnology, Nuclear Research Institute, Nuclear Research Institute,
10 Instituto Superior Técnico
11 Turkish Atomic Energy Authority
12 Radiation Protection Center,
13 Medical University of Sofia,
14 NCRRP - National Center for Radiobiology and Radiation Protection,
15 NUS - National University of Singapore
16 KIRAMS - Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences
17 National Research Institute for Radiobiology & Radiohygiene,
18 UNITUS
19 Zagreb
20 LA FE - Fundación para la Investigación del Hospital Universitario LA FE de la Comunidad Valenciana,
21 PHE - Public Health England, Centre for Radiation Chemical and Environmental Hazards,
22 SERMAS - 21. Servicio Madrileño de Salud - Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón,
23 CNL - Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, Radiobiology & Health, Chalk River
24 BfS - Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz - Federal Office for Radiation Protection
25 Serbian Institute of Occupational Health, Radiation Protection Center
26 Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique et aux énergies alternatives - CEA (FRANCE)
27 VARSOVIE
28 ENEA Centro Ricerche Casaccia
29 ATHENES
30 IRBA
31 Sri Ramachandra University
32 UGENT - Universiteit Gent = Ghent University
33 Health Canada Canadian Science Centre for Human and Animal Health
34 Stockholm University
35 Legnaro
Joan Francesc Barquinero
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1056179
Philip Beukes
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1122051
Inmaculada Dominguez
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1122053
Prakash Hande
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1122055
Roberta Mescini
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1122056
Mirta Milic
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1111346
Sylwester Sommer
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1111343
Georgia Terzoudi
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1111349
Marco Valente
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1111347
Perumal Venkatachalam
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1122059
Demetre Zafiropoulos
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1122060

Résumé

In case of a mass-casualty radiological event, there would be a need for networking to overcome surge limitations and to obtain rapid homogeneous results among biodosimetry laboratories. To achieve this, reported aberration frequencies or estimated doses should be consistent within the network. Inter-laboratory comparisons (ILCs) are widely accepted to reach such homogeneity. At the European level, there has been a great effort to harmonize biological dosimetry laboratories, particularly during the MULTIBIODOSE and RENEB projects. To further the efforts of harmonization, the RENEB consortium launched this intercomparison where all steps in the process were evaluated, from blood shipment to dose estimation. The present exercise involving 38 laboratories from 21 countries also aimed to evaluate the statistical tools used to compare laboratory performance. Blood samples were irradiated at three different doses, 1.8, 0.4 and 0 Gy (samples A, C and B) with 4-MV X-rays at 0.5 Gy min-1, and sent to the participant laboratories, each requested to analyze 500 cells per sample and to report the observed frequency of dicentrics and the estimated dose. This ILC demonstrates that blood samples can be distributed among laboratories worldwide in order to perform biological dosimetry in the event of a major accident. Having achieved the first stage of harmonization, issues were identified with the statistical tools available for ILC analysis that were not able to take advantage of the richness of the results from large ILCs. Even though Z- and U-tests are accepted methods for biodosimetry ILCs, fixing the number of analyzed metaphases to 500 for all investigated doses leads to significant differences of their score distributions in terms of normal approximation. This makes the establishment of a common threshold inappropriate for evaluating a laboratory performance across different dose levels. Another issue highlighted by this ILC is the question of the diversity of dose-effect curves. It clearly appears that, despite the initial advantage of including the scoring specificities of each laboratory, the lack of defined criteria to evaluate the robustness of each laboratory’s curve seems to be a disadvantage for the model of "a curve per laboratory". Finally, and with the same spirit of unification, it seems relevant to develop tools that are better adapted to the collection and processing of results produced by the various participant laboratories. Confidently, after an initial harmonization phase, a new step towards the optimization of laboratory networks in biological dosimetry and associated ILC is now beginning.
Fichier principal
Vignette du fichier
0000168555_002.PDF (52.43 Mo) Télécharger le fichier
Origine : Fichiers produits par l'(les) auteur(s)

Dates et versions

hal-03513527 , version 1 (05-01-2022)

Licence

Paternité - Pas d'utilisation commerciale

Identifiants

Citer

Eric Gregoire, Joan Francesc Barquinero, Gaetan Gruel, Mohamedamine Benadjaoud, Juan Martinez Guerrero, et al.. RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2017: limits and pitfalls of ILCs.. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 2021, 97 (7), pp.888-905. ⟨10.1080/09553002.2021.1928782⟩. ⟨hal-03513527⟩
39 Consultations
301 Téléchargements

Altmetric

Partager

Gmail Facebook X LinkedIn More