Re: RBE for low LET radiations

[Chris Alston <alstonc@odrge.odr.georgetown.edu>]

>X-Sender: zamenhof@po9.mit.edu (Unverified)
>Date:         Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:14:18 -0500
>Reply-To: Medical Physics Mailing List <MEDPHYS@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU>
>Sender: Medical Physics Listserver <medphys@cwis-20.wayne.edu>
>From: "Robert G. Zamenhof" <zamenhof@MIT.EDU>
>Subject:      Re: RBE for low LET radiations
>To: MEDPHYS@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU
>
>This is a very interesting area of radiobiology that has received
>relatively little attention.  A long time ago I submitted a part of a grant
>to look at this in the context of mammographic exam risks.  As you point
>out, the LET of diagnostic x-rays is substantially higher than that of 250
>kVp x-rays or C0-60 gammas, the commonly used references for RBE
>determinations. If I recall correctly, one could argue on the basis of LET
>alone an RBE for 18 keV x-rays of very approximately 5 relative to Co-60.
>In addition, I don't think much is known about the species of free radicals
>produced at such low ionization energies, which would also influence the
>RBE.
>
>Let us know what you find!
>
>
>Robert
>
>Robert G. Zamenhof, Ph.D., D.A.B.R.
>Director, Section of Radiological Physics
>Department of Radiology
>Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School
>1 Deaconess Road, Boston, MA 02215, U.S.A.
>Tel: (617) 667-0175  Fax: (617) 975-5233  E-Mail: zamenhof@mit.edu or
>rzamenho@bidmc.harvard.edu  Beeper (Global): (888) 353-4455
>*** "Non iligitimati carborundum est" ***
>
>                    *****
>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Medphys at:
>http://www.mindspring.com/~sherouse/MPFAQ/
>
>Archives of recent Medphys postings at:
>http://www.escribe.com/medicine/medphys/
>