|Capitolo||Referenza||PM Search||Anno||Autore||Argomento||Tipo||Particle/Missions Type||Note||Dose range/threshold or LET||Experimental Validation|
|cap 3||7||No||2011||"J. Radiat. Res., 52, 126–146 (2011) Biological Effects of Space Radiation on Human Cells:History, Advances and Outcomes Mira MAALOUF1,2, Marco DURANTE3 and Nicolas FORAY1*"||Chromosome cytogenetic data, eye flashes and cataracts occurrence||Space||Comparison with medical exposure. A dose of about 400 μGy per space mission day is 5000 times lower than a radiotherapy fraction (2 Gy), 10–20 times lower than a mammography session (2 × 2 mGy) or than an abdominal CT scan (8 mGy). We have seen above that the average dose rate during missions is about 0.28 μGy.min–1. Such dose rate is about 108 times lower than medical exposure but in the same order than natural radioactivity. ============ RIPORTA UN SACCO DI DATI DOSI ED EFFETTI||Chromosome breaks yields were however found two-fold higher in Apollo than in Gemini astronauts, suggesting for the first time a link between dose and the duration of the flight41) (Table 4). Interestingly, despite some inter-individual variations, the yields of chromosome breaks in lymphocytes from astronauts who had no previous flight experience appeared generally lower than those from experienced astronauts. Lastly, post-flight aberrations were considered to be about two-fold higher than pre-flight values41) (Fig. 1). The first description of eye flashes. Another aspect of biological consequences of space radiation exposure on human cells was the subjective sensations of lights on eyes, commonly called eye flashes. Eye flashes were first observed by Apollo crews (Fig. 1). Such phenomena were initially thought to be due to μ mesons from statistical arguments. However, the actual origin of the eye flashes remained still unresolved at the end of the 1960’s.12) Primary or secondary neutrons and possibly heavy ions, rather than mesons were thereafter suspected to cause eye flashes. Observations on helmets of Apollo astronauts revealing numerous tracks of metallic ions as heavy as zinc and nickel (up to 1011track.cm–2) were questionable since these heavy ions are very rare in space. Such observations suggested therefore that the technical environment of spacecraft itself adds extra-complexity in the actual spectrum of secondary particles.32)The existence of nuclear interaction between high-energy protons and electrons with the abundant metallic stuff surrounding crews may be evoked."||LET> 5 – 10 keV/µm||Yes?|
|cap 3||8||1977|| Life Sci Space Res. 1977;15:141-6. Apollo-Soyuz light-flash observations|
T F Budinger 1, C A Tobias, R H Huesman, F T Upham, T F Wieskamp, R A Hoffman
|Eye Flashes||Space||Apollo-Soyuz Test project||90 minutes at 225 Km altitude compared with Skylab-IV missions at 443 Km Altitude||LET> 5 – 10 keV/µm||?|
|cap 3||9||2002|| Acta Astronaut . 2002 Apr;50(8):511-25. doi: 10.1016/s0094-5765(01)00190-4. Eye light flashes on the Mir space station|
S Avdeev 1, V Bidoli, M Casolino, E De Grandis, G Furano, A Morselli, L Narici, M P De Pascale, P Picozza, E Reali, R Sparvoli, M Boezio, P Carlson, W Bonvicini, A Vacchi, N Zampa, G Castellini, C Fuglesang, A Galper, A Khodarovich, Yu Ozerov, A Popov, N Vavilov, G Mazzenga, M Ricci, W G Sannita, P Spillantini
|Eye Flashes||Space||MIR Station - Measurements done using the "SilEye" detector||LET> 5 – 10 keV/µm||?|
|cap 3||10||2004|| Adv Space Res|
. 2004;33(8):1352-7. doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2003.09.052.
The ALTEA/ALTEINO projects: studying functional effects of microgravity and cosmic radiation
L Narici 1, F Belli, V Bidoli, M Casolino, M P De Pascale, L Di Fino, G Furano, I Modena, A Morselli, P Picozza, E Reali, A Rinaldi, D Ruggieri, R Sparvoli, V Zaconte, W G Sannita, S Carozzo, S Licoccia, P Romagnoli, E Traversa, V Cotronei, M Vazquez, J Miller, V P Salnitskii, O I Shevchenko, V P Petrov, K A Trukhanov, A Galper, A Khodarovich, M G Korotkov, A Popov, N Vavilov, S Avdeev, M Boezio, W Bonvicini, A Vacchi, N Zampa, G Mazzenga, M Ricci, P Spillantini, G Castellini, R Vittori, P Carlson, C Fuglesang, D Schardt
|Eye Flashes microgravity and cosmic radiation||Space||ISS-Station - Measurements done using the ALTEINO detector||NON in tabella ma eventualmente dopo nel testo||solo strumento per misura dose e spettro a brain e visual structures in microgravity conditions.|
|cap 3||11||2002|| J Radiat Res|
. 2002 Dec;43 Suppl:S129-32. doi: 10.1269/jrr.43.s129.
Analysis of complex-type chromosome exchanges in astronauts' lymphocytes after space flight as a biomarker of high-LET exposure
Kerry George 1, Honglu Wu, Veronica Willingham, Francis A Cucinotta
|Chromosome||Space||5 - 150 mGy|| Yes Pooled data for metaphase and PCC analysis for all four ISS crewmembers revealed 6 complex exchanges preflight in a total of 24,136 cells analyzed, and 12 complex exchanges|
were detected in 26,065 cells collected after flight. = Chromosome aberrations in crewmembers’ lymphocytes before and after long duration
Mir flights, measured in metaphase cells. The total number of complex exchanges detected was very low; a total of 8 complex exchanges were detected preflight in
the 20,910 cells analyzed from all crewmembers combined. After flight, 20 complex exchanges were detected in a total of 30,078 cells from all astronauts. ================== It was suggested
that the yield of complex chromosome damage could be underestimated when analyzing metaphase cells collected at one time point after irradiation, and chemically-induced premature chromosome condensation (PCC) may be a more
accurate system since problems with complicated cell-cycle delays are avoided 5).
|cap 3||12||2000|| Radiat Meas|
. 2000 Jun;32(3):181-91. doi: 10.1016/s1350-4487(99)00273-5.
Analysis of MIR-18 results for physical and biological dosimetry: radiation shielding effectiveness in LEO
F A Cucinotta 1, J W Wilson, J R Williams, J F Dicello
|cap 3||13||1997|| Radiat Res|
. 1997 Nov;148(5 Suppl):S17-23.
Biodosimetry results from space flight Mir-18
T C Yang 1, K George, A S Johnson, M Durante, B S Fedorenko
|Chromosome||Space||MIR-18 115-day mission||Cell colture, FISH, GIEMSA frequency evaluation method, 5.2 cGy with RBE=2.8 → 14.75 cSv||LEO|
|cap 3||14||2001|| Chromosome Aberrations in the Blood Lymphocytes of Astronauts after Space|
Author(s): K. George, M. Durante, H. Wu, V. Willingham, G. Badhwar, and F. A. Cucinotta
Source: Radiation Research, 156(6):731-738.
Published By: Radiation Research Society
|Chromosome||Space|| Chromosome Analysis|
The yields of chromosome exchanges in the peripheral
lymphocytes of astronauts increased after long-duration
missions (Table 1, crew members 1–6). However, no significant
increase was observed for two crew members after
a 10-day shuttle mission (Table 1, crew members 7 and 8).
These results are in agreement with data reported by Obe
et al. (3) and Testard et al. (2). The frequencies of exchanges
were similar for crew member 4 in samples collected 9
days and 114 days after a long-duration mission, and for
crew member 3 when values measured on the day of return
were compared to values measured 240 days after flight,
indicating that the clearance of aberrations from the blood
lymphocytes is insignificant over these periods.
| The frequency of complex exchanges after flight was higher in|
prematurely condensed chromosomes than in metaphase cells
for one crew member.
|cap 3||15||1984|| Adaptive Response of Human Lymphocytes to Low Concentrations of RadioactiveThymidine|
Author(s): Gregorio Olivieri, Judy Bodycote and Sheldon Wolff
Source: Science, New Series, Vol. 223, No. 4636 (Feb. 10, 1984), pp. 594-597
|Chromosome||ground simulation||No data from space missions||NO SPAZIO TOGLIERE O CITARE SOLO COME METODO MA NON IN TABELLA|
|cap 3||16||2010|| Health Phys|
. 2010 Feb;98(2):276-81. doi: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181aba9c7.
Quickscan dicentric chromosome analysis for radiation biodosimetry
F N Flegal 1, Y Devantier, J P McNamee, R C Wilkins
|Chromosome||ground simulation||NO SPAZIO TOGLIERE O CITARE SOLO COME METODO MA NON IN TABELLA|
|cap 3||17||2011|| IAEA - Cytogenetic Dosimetry: |
Applications in Preparedness for and Response to Radiation Emergencies
|Chromosome||ground simulation||NO SPAZIO TOGLIERE O CITARE SOLO COME METODO MA NON IN TABELLA|
|cap 3||18||2017|| Int J Radiat Biol|
. 2017 Jan;93(1):20-29. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1233370. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
RENEB intercomparisons applying the conventional Dicentric Chromosome Assay (DCA)
Ursula Oestreicher 1, Daniel Samaga 1, Elizabeth Ainsbury 2, Ana Catarina Antunes 3, Ans Baeyens 4, Leonardo Barrios 5, Christina Beinke 6, Philip Beukes 4, William F Blakely 7, Alexandra Cucu 8, Andrea De Amicis 9, Julie Depuydt 10, Stefania De Sanctis 9, Marina Di Giorgio 11, Katalin Dobos 12, Inmaculada Dominguez 13, Pham Ngoc Duy 14, Marco E Espinoza 15, Farrah N Flegal 16, Markus Figel 17, Omar Garcia 18, Octávia Monteiro Gil 3, Eric Gregoire 19, C Guerrero-Carbajal 20, İnci Güçlü 21, Valeria Hadjidekova 22, Prakash Hande 23, Ulrike Kulka 1, Jennifer Lemon 24, Carita Lindholm 25, Florigio Lista 9, Katalin Lumniczky 12, Wilner Martinez-Lopez 26, Nataliya Maznyk 27, Roberta Meschini 28, Radia M'kacher 29, Alegria Montoro 30, Jayne Moquet 2, Mercedes Moreno 31, Mihaela Noditi 8, Jelena Pajic 32, Analía Radl 11, Michelle Ricoul 29, Horst Romm 1, Laurence Roy 19, Laure Sabatier 29, Natividad Sebastià 30, Jacobus Slabbert 4, Sylwester Sommer 33, Monica Stuck Oliveira 34, Uma Subramanian 7, Yumiko Suto 35, Tran Que 14, Antonella Testa 36, Georgia Terzoudi 37, Anne Vral 10, Ruth Wilkins 38, LusiYanti Yanti 39, Demetre Zafiropoulos 40, Andrzej Wojcik 41
|cap 3||19||2020||Quintens Quintens R., Baatout S., Moreels M. (2020) Assessment of Radiosensitivity and Biomonitoring of Exposure to Space Radiation. In: Choukèr A. (eds) Stress Challenges and Immunity in Space. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16996-1_28||radiosensitivity & biomarkers.||ground simulation|
|cap 3||20||2021|| Identification of novel biomarkers of heavy ion exposure: Proteins, miRNAs and tRNA-derived fragments in serum; HaoBai, Tongshan Zhang, JufangWang, Junrui Hua, Wenjun Wei|
Key Laboratory of Space Radiobiology of Gansu Province & CAS Key Laboratory of Heavy Ion Radiation Biology and Medicine, Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, China
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China
|biomarker||ground simulation||Mice were total-body exposed to different doses of carbon ions with linear energy transfer (LET) of 30 keV/μm. Mouse Antibody Array and RNA sequencing were performed to detect expression profiles of serum proteins and small non-coding RNAs (sncRNAs) at 24 h post-irradiation.||Carbon Ions LET 30 KeV, Threshold 0.1-0.5 Gy|
|cap 3||21||2000|| Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci|
. 2000 Nov;41(12):3898-907.
Growth and differentiation of human lens epithelial cells in vitro on matrix
E A Blakely 1, K A Bjornstad, P Y Chang, M P McNamara, E Chang, G Aragon, S P Lin, G Lui, J R Polansky
|Cataract||ground simulation||in vitro ==NO DATA o models|
|cap 3||22||1989|| Accelerated Heavy Particles and the Lens: III. Cataract Enhancement by Dose Fractionation|
B. V. Worgul, G. R. Merriam, Jr., C. Medvedovsky and D. J. Brenner
|cap 3||23||2001|| Radiat Res|
. 2001 Nov;156(5 Pt 1):460-6. doi: 10.1667/0033-7587(2001)156[0460:sracia]2.0.co;2.
Space radiation and cataracts in astronauts
F A Cucinotta 1, F K Manuel, J Jones, G Iszard, J Murrey, B Djojonegro, M Wear
|cap 3||24||2007|| A review of ground-based heavy-ion radiobiology relevant to space radiation risk assessment. Part II: Cardiovascular and immunological effects|
Eleanor A. Blakely a,*, Polly Y. Chang a,b
|Cataract & CNS||ground simulation|| Typically, astronauts and cosmonauts on the International Space Station (ISS) receive from 0.5 to 1.2 mSv/d, with 75% coming from galactic cosmic ray (GCR) ions and 25% coming from protons encountered in passages through the South Atlantic Anomaly region of the Van Allen belts. The radiation from GCR is continuous and at a very low-dose rate, and thus not only cancer, but also non-cancer effects should be taken into consideration in the evaluation of late effects (Schimmerling and Cucinotta,2006). Space flight affects immune function (Sonnenfeld, 1998, 2001) in astronauts exposed to the conditions of long-term space flight and its rigors of isolation, containment, microgravity, radiation, microbial contamination, sleep disruption, and insufficient nutrition. There is also a recent|
report of changes in neutrophil functions in astronauts (Kaur et al., 2004 Kaur, I., Simons, E.R., Castro, V.A., et al. Changes in neutrophil
functions in astronauts. Brain Behav. Immun. 18 (5), 443–450, 2004.). The study indicates that neutrophil phagocytosis and oxidative functions are affected by factors associated with space flight and this relationship may
depend on mission duration. Decreased non-MHCrestricted (CD56+) killer cell cytotoxicity has also been reported in astronauts after spaceflight (Mehta et al., 2001 Mehta, S.K., Kaur, I., Grimm, E.A., et al. Decreased non-Mhc-restricted
(Cd56+) killer cell cytotoxicity after spaceflight. J. Appl. Physiol. 91(4), 1814–1818, 2001.). Recent studies in humans have investigated the effects of space flight on herpes virus
and Epstein-Barr virus reactivation and have shown increases in urinary catecholamine excretion (Stowe, R.P., Mehta, S.K., Ferrando, A.A., et al. Immune responses and
latent herpesvirus reactivation in spaceflight. Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 72 (10), 884–891, 2001. ———- Stowe, R.P., Pierson, D.L., Barrett, A.D. Elevated stress hormone levels
relate to Epstein-Barr virus reactivation in astronauts. Psychosom. Med. 63 (6), 891–895, 2001. ). Persistent viruses have been associated with
non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma tumors (Vilchez et al., 2002) and raise concerns with regard to susceptibility of crew members to cancer.
|cap 3||25||2009|| Radiation Cataractogenesis: A Review of Recent Studies|
E. A. Ainsbury,a,1 S. D. Bouffler,a W. Do¨ rr,b J. Graw,c C. R. Muirhead,a A. A. Edwardsa and J. Coopera
|Cataract||ground simulation||Here we review the combined results of recent mechanistic and human studies regarding induction of cataracts by ionizing radiation. These studies indicate that the threshold for cataract development is certainly less than was previously estimated, of the order of 0.5 Gy, or that radiation cataractogenesis may in fact be more accurately described by a linear, no-threshold model.||Low LET particle ? , th > 0.5Gy|
|cap 3||26||2010|| Epidemiological Studies of Cataract Risk at Low to Moderate Radiation Doses: (Not) Seeing is Believing|
Roy E. Shore, Kazuo Neriishi, Eiji Nakashima
Radiation Research, Vol. 174, No. 6, Part 2 (December 2010), pp. 889-894
|Cataract||space / ground simulation|
|cap 3||27||2009|| NASA Study of Cataract in Astronauts (NASCA). Report 1: Cross-Sectional Study|
of the Relationship of Exposure to Space Radiation and Risk of Lens Opacity
Author(s): Leo T. Chylack Jr, Leif E. Peterson, Alan H. Feiveson, Mary L. Wear, F. Keith Manuel,
William H. Tung, Dale S. Hardy, Lisa J. Marak, and Francis A. Cucinotta
Source: Radiation Research, 172(1):10-20. 2009.
Published By: Radiation Research Society
|cataract Report 1||space||Participants include 171 consenting astronauts who flew at least one mission in space and a comparison group made up of three components: (a) 53 astronauts who had not flown in space, (b) 95 military aircrew personnel, and © 99 non-aircrew ground-based||10 mSv|
|cap 3||28||SEC||2012|| Radiat Res|
. 2012 Jul;178(1):25-32. doi: 10.1667/rr2876.1. Epub 2012 Jun 12.
NASCA report 2: Longitudinal study of relationship of exposure to space radiation and risk of lens opacity
Leo T Chylack Jr 1, Alan H Feiveson, Leif E Peterson, William H Tung, Mary L Wear, Lisa J Marak, Dale S Hardy, Lori J Chappell, Francis A Cucinotta
|cataract Report 2||space||comparison subjects. Continuous measures of nuclear, cortical and PSC lens opacities were derived from Nidek EAS 1000 digitized images.||10 mSv|
|cap 3||29||YES||2019|| Phys Med. 2019 Jan;57:88-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.01.002. Epub 2019 Jan 3.|
Optimized neuron models for estimation of charged particle energy deposition in
Batmunkh M(1), Aksenova SV(2), Bayarchimeg L(3), Bugay AN(4), Lkhagva O(5).
|CNS||ground simulation||100-2000 mGy|| No only simulation.  Machida M, Lonart G, Britten RA. Low (60 cGy) doses of 56Fe HZE-particle radiation|
lead to a persistent reduction in the glutamatergic readily releasable pool in rat
hippocampal synaptosomes. Radiat Res 2010;174:618. =============Known effects of charged particles traversing the cells of central nervous system (CNS) include degradation of dendrite tree morphology [2,4] and disturbance of electrochemical processes governing synaptic transmission [5,6]. This earliest radiation injury to individual neurons can result in long-term effects including various impairments of behavior, memory and other cognitive deficits [3,7]. Also, the biological efficiency of heavy ions present in galactic space radiation are several times higher than for protons .
The analysis of recent experimental studies at particle accelerators with energetic protons and heavy ions suggests that the hippocampus is one of the most sensitive regions of the CNS under irradiation [1,6]. The hippocampal neurons organized in various neural networks play an important role in learning, memory consolidation as well as in the processing of the information received simultaneously from diverse sources
|cap 3||30||2018|| Biophysics Model of Heavy-Ion Degradation of Neuron Morphology in Mouse Hippocampal Granular Cell Layer Neurons|
Murat Alp, University of Nevada, Las VegasFollow
Francis A. Cucinotta, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
|cap 3||31||SEC||2017|| Life Sci Space Res (Amst)|
. 2017 May;13:27-38. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2017.03.004. Epub 2017 Apr 2.
Track structure model of microscopic energy deposition by protons and heavy ions in segments of neuronal cell dendrites represented by cylinders or spheres
Murat Alp 1, Francis A Cucinotta 2
|cap 3||32||2016|| Differential Superiority of Heavy Charged-Particle irradiation to X-Rays: Studies on Biological|
effectiveness and Side effect Mechanisms in Multicellular Tumor and Normal Tissue Models
Stefan Walenta and Wolfgang Mueller-Klieser*
Institute of Pathophysiology, University Medical Center, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
|citokines Mucositis||Ground|| A relatively novel aspect of radiation-associated mucositis|
results from the ambitious plans of several space agencies, in
particular of the NASA and the ESA, for manned missions to the
Mars. During such a mission which would last around 3 years,
astronauts would be chronically exposed to cosmic radiation due
to the absence of a protecting magnetic field. Space radiation consists of protons (87%), α-particles (12%), and heavy ions (1%) in
solar particle events and galactic cosmic rays (25). In particular,
highly ionizing heavy ions can be hardly shielded exposing the
crew members to a serious medical safety risk (26), since the
probability of getting a hit by heavy charged particles increases
with time in space. It is obvious that the occurrence of oral or
intestinal mucositis during a prolonged space flight would lead
to hazardous situations.
|2000 mGy e fino a 10 Gy per IL6 e IL8 ———————–|| No cita altri =========== Figure 11 demonstrates a consistent and significant elevation of the release of both cytokines upon irradiation for both|
photons (Figures 11A,B) and particles (Figures 11C,D), albeit in the absence of a consistent dose dependency. Figures 12A,B illustrate for X-rays and carbon ions, respectively, that the addition of peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs] increases the radiation-induced release of IL6 and IL8 by factors of 2–3. riporta in FIGURE 12
| Cytokine release following X-ray treatment of organotypic cultures of oral mucosa, determined by commercial ELISA test, as a function
of radiation dose and time after radiation with or without coculturing of peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs; modified according to Ref.
(19)]. (A) IL6 and (B) IL8 =============== poi cita 19. Stahler C, Roth J, Cordes N, Taucher-Scholz G, Mueller-Klieser W. Impact
of carbon ion irradiation on epidermal growth factor receptor signaling and
glioma cell migration in comparison to conventional photon irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol (2013) 89(6):454–61. doi:10.3109/09553002.2013.766769 —- Double-strand breaks (DSB) in organotypic cultures of oral mucosa, determined by evaluation of γH2AX stainings in immune fluorescence microscopy, as a function of radiation dose and time after radiation [modified according to Ref. (19)] applying (A) X-rays and (B) carbon ions.
|cap 3||33||2014|| Carbon ions and X‑rays induce pro‑inflammatory effects|
in 3D oral mucosa models with and without PBMCs
Viktoria Tschachojan1, Henrike Schroer1, Nicole Averbeck2 and Wolfgang Mueller-Klieser1
|citokines Mucositis||ground simulation||X 12C|| The focus of the present study was on immediate and early|
pro‑inflammatory effects after irradiation, where nuclear
factor κB (NFκB) activation and increased expression of the
cytokines and chemokines are precursors of oral mucositis
(22). By way of comparison, we additionally exposed the 3D
mucosa model containing PBMCs to X‑rays. Following irradiation
with X‑rays or heavy ions (12C), we analyzed the radiation
impact on epithelium compactness, DNA damage, activation
of NFκB and the release of the cytokine interleukin 6 (IL6)
and chemokine IL8.
| Quantification of the DNA damage in irradiated|
mucosa models revealed distinctly more DSB after heavyion
irradiation compared to X‑rays at definite time points,
suggesting a higher gene toxicity of heavy ions. NFκB activation
was observed after treatment with X‑rays or 12C particles.
ELISA analyses showed significantly higher IL6 and IL8
levels after irradiation with X‑rays and 12C particles compared
to non-irradiated controls, whereas co‑cultures including
PBMCs released 2 to 3-fold higher interleukin concentrations
compared to mucosa models without PBMCs. In this study,
we demonstrated that several pro-inflammatory markers are
induced by X‑rays and heavy-ion irradiation within an oral
mucosa model. This suggests that oral mucositis indeed poses
a risk for astronauts on extended space flights.
|cap 3||34||YES||2015|| Front Oncol. 2015 Jun 4;5:122. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2015.00122. eCollection 2015.|
Issues for Simulation of Galactic Cosmic Ray Exposures for Radiobiological
Research at Ground-Based Accelerators.
Kim MH(1), Rusek A(2), Cucinotta FA(3).
|CVD ?||ground simulation||1000 mGy||in Japan atomic bomb survivors|
|cap 3||35||2013||Cucinotta FA, Kim MH, Chappell LJ, Huff JL. How safe is safe enough? Radiation risk for a human mission to Mars. PLoS One. 2013 Oct 16;8(10):e74988. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074988. PMID: 24146746; PMCID: PMC3797711.||Cardio & Cancer||ground||stima su modello NASA|| We used NASA’s models of risks and uncertainties based on recent radio-epidemiology studies of cancer, GCR environmental models, particle transport codes describing the GCR modification by atomic and nuclear interactions in spacecraft and tissue shielding, and models of biological effectiveness of different radiation types [5,6]. The model  includes NASA defined quality factors for solid cancer and leukemia risk estimates for HZE particles, and use of a never-smoker population to represent astronauts. Risk predictions were made for missions near solar minimum using the average of these derived from historical data on sunspot numbers for solar cycles 1 to 24, and fitted to modern data on GCR composition and energy spectra [5,14,15]. |
Transport codes describe the atomic and nuclear interactions of particles including projectile and target nuclei fragmentation and production of light particles (protons, neutrons, helium etc.) [16,17]. Recent spacecraft such as the International Space Station (ISS) or Orion capsule developed as an exploration mission crew transfer vehicle have an average of about 20 g/cm2 equivalent aluminum shielding, which is used in risk calculations. For the martian surface we use an average shielding thickness of 10 g/cm2 to represent a light surface habitat, and included the martian atmosphere represented by CO2 with a 18 g/cm2 vertical height.
Results for the ISS include the trapped protons  along with GCR. Previous reports demonstrate that NASA’s model agrees with spaceflight dosimetry measurements [5,18,19] to within 15%.
Organ doses and probability distribution functions (PDF) describing uncertainties in model parameters  are summarized in Tables S1 and S2 in File S1, respectively.
Circulatory disease risks included cardiovascular disease (CVD) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) using excess relative risk (ERR) estimates from a recent meta-analysis of studies of atomic bomb survivors, and nuclear workers in several countries . Circulatory disease risk estimates were made using the non-cancer effects dose equivalent for the blood forming system (BFO) based on a distinct relative biological effectiveness (RBE) factor compared [20,21] to that of cancer estimates, and without the use of a dose and doserate reduction effectiveness factor (DDREF). ==============The probability of causation (PC) (also denoted as attributable risk) is a conditional probability used as an indicator of a potential causal relationship between radiation exposure and occurrence of
disease in a population. Our predictions (Fig. 4) suggest that a large portion of cancers that would be observed in crews after exploration missions would be attributed to GCR exposure, with PC for leukemia, stomach, colon, lung, bladder, ovarian, and
esophageal cancer significant. PC will increase modestly for longer post-mission times for most solid cancers and circulatory diseases, and decrease for leukemia. PC estimates for CVD and IHD were smaller than for many cancers because of the larger background
occurrence for these diseases. Estimates for CVD and IHD incidence were not made, since only values ERR for mortality were available from the meta-analysis of Little et al. . However obviously morbidity risks for circulatory diseases would be larger than mortality risk estimates and therefore add substantially to the overall morbidity of astronauts returning from a Mars mission. —– Risk was much less on ISS compared to deep space missions, and missions of 1-year on the ISS at solar minimum are within the acceptable risk level for astronauts . In contrast, because the exposure is to all GCR energies and the longer mission duration, exploration missions exceeded NASA’s radiation limit by a large amount.
|cap 3||36||2018|| Radiation Exposure and Mortality|
from Cardiovascular Disease and
Cancer in Early NASA Astronauts
S. Robin Elgart1, Mark P. Little 2, Lori J. Chappell3, Caitlin M. Milder4, Mark R. Shavers3,
Janice L. Huff5 & Zarana S. Patel3
|Cardio & Cancer||Space||Astronauts selected from 1959–1969 were included and followed until death or February 2017, with 39 of 73 individuals still alive at that time.|
|cap 3||37||2016||Delp MD, Charvat JM, Limoli CL, Globus RK, Ghosh P. Apollo Lunar Astronauts Show Higher Cardiovascular Disease Mortality: Possible Deep Space Radiation Effects on the Vascular Endothelium. Sci Rep. 2016 Jul 28;6:29901. doi: 10.1038/srep29901. PMID: 27467019; PMCID: PMC4964660.||Cardio||Space|| The group of all flight astronauts was comprised|
of 5 females and 37 males, of which the LEO astronaut subgroup contained 5 females and 30 males and
the Apollo lunar astronaut subgroup was comprised of 7 males. The non-flight astronauts consisted of 3 females
and 32 males.
| Interactions of the galactic cosmic rays with the spacecraft hull will have a large impact on the radiation exposure|
of astronauts. Charged particles traversing the hull or “shielding” of the ship will incur nuclear interactions
that depend on the composition and thickness of the hull material. These interactions will result in fragmentation
products and particles of reduced energy but higher LET that contribute to the radiation dose within the
spacecraft. The average radiation dose for the seven deceased Apollo crew was 0.59 ± 0.15 cGy (range 0.18–1.14 cGy)31. If we assume representative shielding scenarios (10 g/cm2) for the Apollo Command Module and radiation
quality factors drawn from the most recent International Commission on Radiological Protection33, then the
average radiation dose from the galactic cosmic rays to the Apollo astronauts would be approximately 0.295 cGy,
or roughly half the total dose during their lunar excursions9. Using similar assumptions, astronauts in LEO would
receive 50–100 mSv over a 6–12 month stay, of which the galactic cosmic rays would account for approximately
two-thirds of this total dose9. Thus, given their mean mission duration of 15.6 days, the deceased LEO astronauts
would receive approximately 0.29 cGy, a galactic cosmic ray dose very similar to the Apollo lunar astronauts.
| Results show there were no differences in CVD mortality rate between non-flight (9%)|
and LEO (11%) astronauts. However, the CVD mortality rate among Apollo lunar astronauts (43%) was
4–5 times higher than in non-flight and LEO astronauts. To test a possible mechanistic basis for these
findings, a secondary purpose was to determine the long-term effects of simulated weightlessness and
space-relevant total-body irradiation on vascular responsiveness in mice. The results demonstrate that
space-relevant irradiation induces a sustained vascular endothelial cell dysfunction. Such impairment
is known to lead to occlusive artery disease, and may be an important risk factor for CVD among
astronauts exposed to deep space radiation.
|cap 3||38||2016||Cucinotta FA, Hamada N, Little MP. No evidence for an increase in circulatory disease mortality in astronauts following space radiation exposures. Life Sci Space Res (Amst). 2016 Aug;10:53-6. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2016.08.002. Epub 2016 Aug 20. PMID: 27662788.||Cardio||Space||Delp et al. (2016 ) did not consider the participation of Apollo lunar mission crew in other missions, radiation doses, and time in space under microgravity conditions. Table 1 makes it clear that several Apollo astronauts also participated in low Earth orbit (LEO) missions, including 2 on Mercury, 17 on Gemini, 2 on Sklyab, 1 on Apollo-Soyuz, and 4 on space shuttle (Space Transportation Sys- tem, STS) missions. There are substantial variations in radiation dose, depending on the specific missions, and concomitant radi- ation exposures received by astronauts ( Cucinotta, 2001; Cucinotta et al., 2008; Cucinotta et al., 2003; National Council on Radio- logical Protection and Measurements (NCRP), 1989) . Doses from medical diagnostic exposures and the use of experimental pro- tocols using radioisotopes were much higher for astronauts par- ticipating in the Apollo program compared to more recent astro- nauts ( Cucinotta, 2001; National Council on Radiological Protec- tion and Measurements (NCRP), 1989) . Several Apollo astronauts received small doses during training with the lunar rover at the Nevada (nuclear weapons) Test Site prior to their missions. As- tronauts accumulate significant radiation doses from aviation with large individual variations occurring due to factors such as mili- tary backgrounds, and aviation frequency for pilots versus mission specialists. Average absorbed doses due to space radiation exposures re- ceived by astronauts are recorded based on crew personal dosime- ters, and used to make estimates of effective doses that adjust for radiation quality effects and tissue shielding.||Delp et al. (2016) do not clarify the precise disease endpoints that are used, in particular they do not define what is meant by CVD. This often refers to a much smaller group of morbidities than circulatory disease, in particular heart and blood vessel disease, including ischemic heart disease (IHD) [ICD-10 I20-I25], hyperten- sive disease [ICD-10 I10-I15], cerebrovascular disease (CeVD) [ICD- 10 I60-I69], and diseases of the veins, arteries and arterioles [ICD- 10 I80-I89]. Data collection was incomplete, and particularly so for non-flight astronauts where death certifi- cates were available for only 49%, with the remaining information coming from newspaper and journal articles. ————–|
|cap 3||39||1993||UNSCEAR||Cancer||space / ground simulation||<100 mGy||Yes|
|cap 3||40||2007||ICRP 2007||Cancer||space / ground simulation|
|cap 3||41||2015||NCRP. (2015||Cancer||space / ground simulation|
|cap 3||42||2017||McLean AR, Adlen EK, Cardis E, Elliott A, Goodhead DT, Harms-Ringdahl M, Hendry JH, Hoskin P, Jeggo PA, Mackay DJC, Muirhead CR, Shepherd J, Shore RE, Thomas GA, Wakeford R, Godfray HCJ. A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning the health effects of low-level ionizing radiation. Proc Biol Sci. 2017 Sep 13;284(1862):20171070. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1070. PMID: 28904138; PMCID: PMC5597830.||Cancer||ground simulation|
|cap 3||43||2017||Weber W, Zanzonico P. The Controversial Linear No-Threshold Model. J Nucl Med. 2017 Jan;58(1):7-8. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.116.182667. Epub 2016 Oct 6. PMID: 27754908.||Cancer||ground simulation|
|cap 3||44||2018||ScottScott BR. A Critique of Recent Epidemiologic Studies of Cancer Mortality Among Nuclear Workers. Dose Response. 2018 May 28;16(2):1559325818778702. doi: 10.1177/1559325818778702. PMID: 29872372; PMCID: PMC5974569.||Cancer||ground simulation|
|cap 3||45||2012|| Space Radiation Cancer Risk Projections and |
Uncertainties – 2012
Francis A. Cucinotta
NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
Myung-Hee Y. Kim and Lori J. Chappell
U.S.R.A., Division of Space Life Sciences
|cap 3||46||2017|| Predictions of space radiation fatality risk for exploration missions|
Francis A. Cucinotta∗
, Khiet To, Eliedonna Cacao
|cap 4||47||YES||2015|| Health Phys. 2015 Feb;108(2):131-42. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000255.|
Review of NASA approach to space radiation risk assessments for Mars
|Appo||2011|| Radiat Res. 2011 Jul;176(1):102-14. doi: 10.1667/rr2540.1. Epub 2011 May 16.|
Updates to astronaut radiation limits: radiation risks for never-smokers.
Cucinotta FA(1), Chappell LJ.
|Cancer||Space||No data from space missions||Risk Projection, Astronaut Radiation Limits, LSS atomic bomb survivor, Lung and total cancer risk estimation|
|Appo||2012|| J Radiat Res. 2012;53(1):51-7. doi: 10.1269/jrr.11121.|
Heavy ions can enhance TGFÎ² mediated epithelial to mesenchymal transition.
Wang M(1), Hada M, Huff J, Pluth JM, Anderson J, O'Neill P, Cucinotta FA.
|Cancer||Space||No data from space missions||Experiments using heavy ions were performed at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) in Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL, NY). Si nuclei with an energy of 170 MeV/u, and LET of 99 keV/μm, and Fe nuclei with an energy of 600 MeV/u, and LET of 180 keV/μm were delivered at the indicated doses. A 20 × 20 cm2 beam ensured complete and equal exposure to all samples. The dose rate was between 0.25 to 1 Gy/min dependent upon dose. T25 flasks containing exponentially growing cells were exposed vertically with the cell surface facing the beams. Cells were irradiated 1 h after TGFβ1 treatment and harvested 2 (Mv1Lu) or 3 days (EPC2) after TGFβ1 and/ or Silicon/Iron irradiation||Heavy Ions (0.1-2 Gy)|
|Appo||2013|| Mutat Res. 2013 Aug 30;756(1-2):165-9. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2013.04.007. Epub |
2013 Apr 29.
Cytogenetic damage in the blood lymphocytes of astronauts: effects of repeat
long-duration space missions.
George K(1), Rhone J, Beitman A, Cucinotta FA.
|Cytogenetic Biodosimetry, Chromosome Damage||Space||ISS Long Stay missions (5 Astronauts)||ISS stay > 2 months||No|
|Appo||2014|| Life (Basel). 2014 Sep 11;4(3):491-510. doi: 10.3390/life4030491.|
Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit.
Chancellor JC(1), Scott GB(2), Sutton JP(3).
|Cancer, CNS, Tissue degenaeration, Acute Radiation Syndrome||No data from space missions||Not specifc model addresses , but an overview of possible new approaches using 'omics and ground simulation experiments at accelerators|| aberrations ================ In 2008, using multi-color fluorescence in situ hybridization, Cucinotta et al. vividly showed complex chromosomal aberrations in lymphocyte cells involving three or more chromosomes, observed post-mission in ISS astronauts , (Figure 5). This work was significant, as it demonstrated gross biomolecular damage at the fundamental DNA level within ISS crewmembers as a result of exposure to space radiation . Radiation Carcinogenesis It still remains to be determined whether the higher doses of radiation incurred during future exploration class missions beyond LEO will increase the threat of cancer for astronaut crews .|
The elevated risk for astronauts developing cancer during or following a mission is directly related to the dose of radiation received . Shavers et al. determined that the doses received by astronauts during extended ISS missions were typically greater than 70 mSv . non dimostrabile per confonding factors ============= However, interpretation of these studies is limited by significant individual variability and insufficient statistical power [37–40]. This has led to the dose-limiting guidelines that are currently amongst the highest occupational radiation exposure levels , (Table 1).
Table 1. Example career effective dose limits in units of Sieverts as calculated for one-year ISS missions. The radiation exposure-induced average life-loss per death for carcinogenesis is shown in parenthesis . CNS ============= Recent studies at NASA’s Space Radiation Laboratory using heavy-ion beams to simulate the GCR environment have provided evidence of the CNS health risk for missions outside of LEO. Britten et al. have shown that doses as low as 20 cGy of simulated GCR radiation (1 GeV/u 56Fe particles) can significantly impair learning and memory in a rodent model. Space radiation-induced CNS effects are not limited to the effects of HZE particles. Hienz et al.
demonstrated that proton radiation caused marked neurocognitive deficits at doses as low as 25 cGy. Susceptibility to radiation-induced CNS changes was measured, and it was shown that the more radiosensitive animals exhibited significant changes in proteins associated with dopamine receptors and transporters in the brain. These results may indicate that dopamine levels have an important role in neurobehavioral response to radiation [60,61]. These research data demonstrate that important changes to the CNS can be expected to occur at mission-relevant dose and dose rate levels. Research is still needed to clearly elucidate the significance
to astronaut morbidity.
|Appo||2015|| Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2015 Sep;166(1-4):282-9. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncv144. Epub |
2015 Apr 16.
Biophysics of NASA radiation quality factors.
|Cancer||Space||No data from space missions||Cancer Risk Assessment and projections|| Results(1) for the overall PDF of the NASA QF|
function for solid cancers (upper panel) and leukemia (lower
panel) versus kinetic energy for Fe particles. Median value
and 95% confidence intervals are shown , Range showed is 100KeV to 10 GeV
|Appo||2015|| Mutat Res. 2015 May;775:10-8. doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2015.03.003. Epub 2015 Mar |
The effect of low dose ionizing radiation on homeostasis and functional
integrity in an organotypic human skin model.
von Neubeck C(1), Geniza MJ(2), Kauer PM(3), Robinson RJ(3), Chrisler WB(3),
|Tissue skin degeneration||Ground||No data from space missions|| n vitro 3-D organotypic skin model consisting of epidermal keratinocytes and dermal fibroblasts were |
23 obtained from MatTek (EpiDermFT 400, MatTek Corp., Ashland, MA, USA). Tissue samples were
24 randomized upon receipt to exclude production specific alterations. Samples were grown at 37°C, 95%
humidity and 5% CO2 25 in a 6-transwell insert system and maintained in 3 ml of maintenance medium
26 (MatTek Corp.). Three hours prior to irradiation, the culture media was replaced with 2 ml fresh media.
27 Due to constraints in beam time availability, sample age and equilibration times (minimum 24 h) could
Von Neubeck et al. Page
1 not be held constant. Ion exposures were performed at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) at
2 Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL, Uptown, NY, USA, campaigns IIA, IIB and IIC). Table 1
3 summarizes the ion exposure conditions, including ion species, LET, energy, and dose. Exposures were
designed to deliver either a mean value of one primary ion traversal/basal cell (F2 = 1.1 x 10-3
ions/µm2 4 )
or one traversal for every third cell in the basal layer (F1 = 3.6 x 10-4
ions/µm2 5 ) . Neon information
6 from previous experimental exposures is included for the purpose of discussion only . Samples were
7 oriented at 45° from the incident particle beam to provide a more uniform irradiation to all samples and to
8 minimize scattering and secondary ionizations from the container walls. Post exposure, the culture media
9 of samples with an incubation time longer than 8 h was supplemented with an additional 1 ml of fresh
10 media. Time matched controls are included for all exposures.
|Low dose of High LET (O, Si, Fe) ions|
|Appo||2015|| Radiat Res. 2015 Jan;183(1):1-26. doi: 10.1667/RR13804.1. Epub 2015 Jan 7.|
Understanding cancer development processes after HZE-particle exposure: roles of
ROS, DNA damage repair and inflammation.
Sridharan DM(1), Asaithamby A, Bailey SM, Costes SV, Doetsch PW, Dynan WS,
Kronenberg A, Rithidech KN, Saha J, Snijders AM, Werner E, Wiese C, Cucinotta
FA, Pluth JM.
|Chromosome damage||Ground||No data from space missions||NASA Space Radiation Laboratory|
|Appo||2016|| . Radiat Res. 2016 Dec;186(6):624-637. doi: 10.1667/RR14569.1. Epub 2016 Dec 7.|
Modeling Heavy-Ion Impairment of Hippocampal Neurogenesis after Acute and
Cacao E(1), Cucinotta FA(1).
|Cancer||Ground||No data from space missions|| Here, we have extended our recent work in a mouse model of impaired neurogenesis after exposure to low-linear energy transfer |
(LET) radiation to heavy ion irradiation. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a predictive mathematical model of radiation-induced changes to neurogenesis for a variety of radiation types after acute or fractionated
|Appo||2016|| Life Sci Space Res (Amst). 2016 Jun;9:19-47. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2016.05.004. |
Epub 2016 May 21.
Evaluating biomarkers to model cancer risk post cosmic ray exposure.
Sridharan DM(1), Asaithamby A(2), Blattnig SR(3), Costes SV(1), Doetsch PW(4),
Dynan WS(4), Hahnfeldt P(5), Hlatky L(5), Kidane Y(6), Kronenberg A(1), Naidu
MD(5), Peterson LE(7), Plante I(6), Ponomarev AL(6), Saha J(2), Snijders AM(1),
Srinivasan K(2), Tang J(8), Werner E(4), Pluth JM(9).
|Cancer||Ground||No data from space missions||Highlight of factors that could be important in choosing biomarkers to evaluate the potential for biomarkers to inform models of post exposure cancer risk||Datasets used : Protons (4.5 MeV), Gamma (Cs-137,5Gy), Fe(1.667Gy 1GeV), Breast Cancer , Colorectal Cancer, Lung Cancer|
|Appo||2016|| PLoS One. 2016 Apr 25;11(4):e0153998. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153998. |
Relative Biological Effectiveness of HZE Particles for Chromosomal Exchanges and
Other Surrogate Cancer Risk Endpoints.
Cacao E(1), Hada M(2), Saganti PB(2), George KA(3), Cucinotta FA(1).
|Chromosome Aberrations , Cancer Risk||Ground||No data from space missions||Linear and Non targeted effects studied in surrogate endpoints of cancer risk in cell culture models. Also influence of possible NTEs on the RBE values are investigated.||Low doses < 0.1 Gy, also 1 Gy doses, Heavy Nucleai (C, O, Ne, Si, Ti, Fe, )|
|Appo||2017|| Life Sci Space Res (Amst). 2017 May;13:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2017.01.005. |
Epub 2017 Feb 1.
Predictions of space radiation fatality risk for exploration missions.
Cucinotta FA(1), To K(2), Cacao E(2).
|Cancer||Space||No data from space missions||during space missions are used in the modeling studies.||ISS long stay = 1 year; Deep space 1 Year; Mars 940 day mission ( surface?)|
|2018|| Health Phys. 2018 Feb;114(2):243-245. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000760.|
NCRP Program Area Committee 1: Basic Criteria, Epidemiology, Radiobiology, and
Bernstein J, Woloschak GE.
|Cardio||Space||non lo metterei solo un riassunto di un meeting con no data|
|Appo||2018|| Life Sci Space Res (Amst). 2018 Feb;16:76-83. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2017.12.002. |
Epub 2017 Dec 21.
Dynamical modeling approach to risk assessment for radiogenic leukemia among
astronauts engaged in interplanetary space missions. (Cancer)
Smirnova OA(1), Cucinotta FA(2).
|Cancer||Space (Biological Models)||No data from space missions||Numerous scenarios of space radiation exposure (SPE, Shielding, GCR, mission durations,…)|
|Appo||2019|| Int J Radiat Biol. 2019 Oct;95(10):1361-1371. doi: |
10.1080/09553002.2018.1562252. Epub 2019 Jan 31.
Low-dose radiobiology program at Canadian nuclear laboratories: past, present,
Wang Y(1)(2), Bannister LA(1)(2), Sebastian S(1), Le Y(1)(2), Ismail Y(1),
Didychuk C(1), Richardson RB(1)(3), Flegal F(1), Paterson LC(1), Causey P(1),
Fawaz A(1), Wyatt H(1), Priest N(4), Klokov D(1)(2).
|Appo||2019|| Radiat Res. 2019 Nov;192(5):463-472. doi: 10.1667/RR15419.1. Epub 2019 Aug 15.|
Meta-analysis of Cognitive Performance by Novel Object Recognition after Proton
and Heavy Ion Exposures.
Cacao E(1), Cucinotta FA(1).
|Ground||No data from space missions|| Here we report on the first quantitative |
meta-analysis of the dose response for proton and heavy ion rodent studies of
the widely used novel object recognition (NOR) test, which estimates detriments
in recognition or object memory
|Appo||2021|| Life Sci Space Res (Amst). 2021 Aug;30:82-95. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2021.06.002. |
Epub 2021 Jun 19.
What can space radiation protection learn from radiation oncology?
Tinganelli W(1), Luoni F(2), Durante M(3).
|Cancer, CNS , CVD, …||Ground|| cataract ====================== In addition, the RBE of heavy ions for cataractogenesis is very high, ~50 at doses <100 mGy (Hamada and Sato, 2016), and it is therefore expected that the effect can be observed also in space. In fact, we have clear evidence that space radiation induces ocular cataract in astronauts (Chylack et al., 2012; Cucinotta et al., 2001), and indeed lens opacification is the only proven space-radiation effect actually observed|
in crews of space missions. CVD ==============For space travel, the question is whether CVD risk is increased also at doses <1 Gy, and what is the RBE at low doses for CVD induction (Sylvester et al., 2018). It is also necessary to consider that the cardiovascular system is highly perturbated by weightlessness, and the overall impact on CVD remains unclear (Hughson et al., 2017). Individual susceptibility =================== For space agencies, information on individual radiosensitivity would be very useful for crew selection, at least to exclude individuals hypersensitive to radiation exposure (NCRP, 2010). Genetic screening is therefore potentially a very effective countermeasure to prevent GCR damage in space (Locke and Weil, 2016; Sridharan et al., 2016). On the other hand, recent molecular studies in astronauts show that specific miRNA signatures can be biomarker of sensitivity to radiation exposure (Garrett-Bakelman et al., 2019; Malkani et al., 2020). The field of individual susceptibility is therefore rapidly progressing both in radiotherapy and space medicine, and a tight collaboration is
|Appo||2021|| . Sci Rep. 2021 Jun 3;11(1):11687. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-90695-5.|
An easy-to-use function to assess deep space radiation in human brains.
Khaksarighiri S(1), Guo J(2)(3)(4), Wimmer-Schweingruber R(1), Narici L(5)(6).
|?||?|| . We use a realistic model of the |
head/brain structure and calculate the radiation deposit therein by realistic
SEP events, also under various shielding scenarios.
|Appo||2021|| Radiat Environ Biophys. 2021 May;60(2):213-231. doi: 10.1007/s00411-021-00910-0. |
Epub 2021 Apr 30.
A bespoke health risk assessment methodology for the radiation protection of
Walsh L(1), Hafner L(2), Straube U(3), Ulanowski A(4)(5), Fogtman A(3), Durante
M(6)(7), Weerts G(3), Schneider U(8)(9).
|Cancer (solid and Leukemia)||Space||No data from space missions|| Results are provided for all solid cancer plus leukemia incidence RADS from |
estimated doses from theoretical radiation exposures accumulated during
long-term missions to the Moon or Mars.
|Moon and Mars long term mission exposure|
|Appo||2014|| Space radiation risks to the central nervous system|
Francis A.Cucinottaa,∗, MuratAlpa, Frank M.Sulzmanb, MinliWangb
|eye flashes||Space/ground simulation||studies in astronauts|| Table1Comparison of NSCR-2012 model to MSL Rad measurements for average dose-rate and dose equivalent rate on cruise phase to Mars and on Martian surface. 3.3. Limitations to studies in astronauts|
The possible observation of CNS effects in astronauts partici-pating in past NASA missions is highly unlikely. First, because the lengths of past missions are relatively short and the population size of astronauts is small. Secondly, in low Earth orbit (LEO) as-tronauts are partially protected by the Earth’s magnetic field and the solid body of the Earth, which together reduce the GCR dose-rate by about 2/3from its free space values. Furthermore, the GCR in LEO has lower LET components compared to the GCR to be encountered in transit to Mars or on the lunar surface because the Earth’s magnetic field repels nuclei with energies below about 1000MeV/u, which are of higher LET. For these reasons, the CNS risks are of a higher concern for long-duration lunar missions or for a Mars mission than for missions on the International Space Station (ISS).
|One area where direct observations of space radiation effects on astronauts has been demonstrated is the light flashes that were observed by the astronauts during the early Apollo missions and dedicated experiments subsequently performed on later Apollo and Skylab missions (Pinsky et al., 1974). More recently, studies of light flashes have been made on the Russian Mir space station and the International Space Station (ISS) (Sannita et al., 2004). A1973 re-port by the National Academy of Science discussed these effectsin detail. This phenomenon, known as a phosphene, is the visual perception of flickering light. It is considered a subjective sensa-tion of light since it can be caused by simply applying pressure on the eyeball (NCRP, 2006). The traversal of a single highly charged particle through the occipital cortex or the retina was estimated to be able to cause a light flash. Possible mechanisms for HZE-induced light flashes include direct ionization and Cerenkov ra-diation within the retina. The observation of light flashes by the astronauts helped bring attention to the possible effects of HZE nuclei on brain function (NAS, 1973). ====== Recent debate has considered if cataracts will occur without a dose threshold (ICRP, 2012). The increased inci-dence of cataracts observed after the low space radiation doses of past space missions (Cucinotta et al., 2001, Chylack et al., 2009;Chylack et al., 2012), where only a small fraction of cells in a tis-sue are damaged, suggests that new paradigms for deterministic effects should be considered. ====== The studies of Britten (Britten et al., 2010, 2012; Lonart et al., 2012) has considered the possibility that neurocognitive tasks reg-ulated by the prefrontal cortex could be impaired after exposure to low doses of HZE-particles, which could prevent astronauts from performing complex executive functions.|
|2014|| Space radiation risks to the central nervous system|
Francis A.Cucinottaa,∗, MuratAlpa, Frank M.Sulzmanb, MinliWangb
|CNS||Space/ground simulation|| In the past, limiting the risks to the CNS of adults exposed to low to moderate doses of ionizing radiation has not been a con-cern for occupational radiation exposure. CNS injury that occurs after high doses of radiation used in radiotherapy, including early delayed effects such as demyelination and late delayed effects such as vascular damage and white matter necrosis, are not a concern for spaceflight (Tofilon and Fike, 2000;Hopewell, 1994). However, the HZE particle component of space radiation presents distinct biophysical challenges to cells and tissues compared to terrestrial forms of radiation. Soon after the discovery of cosmic rays, the concern for CNS risks originated with the prediction of the light flash phenomenon from single HZE nuclei traversals of the retina (Tobias, 1952), which was later confirmed by the Apollo astronauts. HZE nuclei are capable of producing a column of heavily damaged cells along their path through tissues, described as a microlesion (NAS, 1973;Todd, 1989), possibly leading to negative impacts on CNS function. In the last decade new hypotheses for mechanisms of HZE damage to the CNS have been described related to the observation of cognitive changes, the impacts by HZE nuclei on neurogenesis, and pathological changes related to Alzheimer’s dis-ease and other late effects in experimental studies of the CNS. ============ Limitations to studies in astronauts|
The possible observation of CNS effects in astronauts partici-pating in past NASA missions is highly unlikely. First, because the lengths of past missions are relatively short and the population size of astronauts is small. Secondly, in low Earth orbit (LEO) as-tronauts are partially protected by the Earth’s magnetic field and the solid body of the Earth, which together reduce the GCR dose-rate by about 2/3from its free space values