Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme [5]

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 79, Issue 946, 2006, Pages 854-855

  Redpath, J L ^a   Mitchel, R E J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

BETA RADIATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CARCINOGENICITY; GAMMA RADIATION; GENE MUTATION; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; LETTER; MALIGNANT TRANSFORMATION; MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIATION CARCINOGENESIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIATION RESPONSE; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED KINGDOM; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; FEMALE; MASS SCREENING; NOTE; RADIATION INJURY; RELATIVE BIOLOGIC EFFECTIVENESS; X RAY;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; RELATIVE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTIVENESS; RISK ASSESSMENT; X-RAYS;

EID: 33750133526     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr/18449523     Document Type: Letter

References (13)

1. Heyes GJ, Mill AJ, Charles MW. Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme. Br J Radiol 2006;79: 195-200.
2. Heyes GJ, Mill AJ. The neoplastic potential of mammography X rays and the atomic bomb spectrum radiation. Radiat Res 2004;162:120-7.
3. Kruger RL, Shueler BA. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. Med Phys 2001;28:1449-54.
4. Azzam EI, De Toledo SM, Raaphorst GP, Mitchel R. Low dose ionizing radiation decreases the frequency of neoplastic transformation to a level below the spontaneous rate in C3H10T1/2 cells. Radiat Res 1996;146:369-73.
5. Redpath JL, Antoniono RA. Induction of an adaptive response against low dose gamma radiation. Radiat Res 1998;149:517-20.
6. Redpath JL, Liang D, Taylor TH, Christie C, Elmore E. The shape of the dose-response curve for radiation-induced neoplastic transformation in vitro: evidence for an adaptive response at low doses of low-LET radiation. Radiat Res 2001;156:700-7.
7. Redpath JL, Lu Q, Lao X-Y, Molloi SY, Elmore E. Low doses of diagnostic energy X-rays protect against neoplastic transformation in vitro. Int J Radiat Biol 2003;79: 235-40.
8. Elmore E, Lao X-Y, Ko M, Rightnar S, Nelson G, Redpath JL. Neoplastic transformation in vitro induced by low doses of 232 MeV protons. Int J Radiat Biol 2005;81:291-7.
9. Ko SJ, Lao X-Y, Molloi S, Elmore E, Redpath JL. Neoplastic transformation in vitro after exposure to low doses of mammographic energy x-rays: quantitative and mechanistic aspects. Radiat Res 2004;162:646-54.
10. Preston DL, Mattsson A, Holmberg E, Shore R, Hildreth NG, Boice JD Jr. Radiation effects on breast cancer risk: a pooled analysis of eight cohorts. Radiat Res 2002;158:220-35.
11. Narod SA, Lubinski J, Ghadrinian P, Lynch HT, Moller P, Foulkes WD, et al. Screening mammography and the risk of breast cancer in BRCAl and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a case-control study. Lancet Oncol 2006;7:402-6.
12. BEIR VII Phase 2. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2006.
13. Tubiana M, Aurengo A. Dose-effect relationship and estimation of the carcinogenic effects of lowdoses of ionizing radiation: the Joint Report of the Academje des Sciences and Academie Nationale de Medecine. Int J Low Radiation 2006;2:1-19.