BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

British Journal of Radiology (2006) 79, 195-200
© 2006 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/21958628

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Heyes, G J
Right arrow Articles by Charles, M W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Heyes, G J
Right arrow Articles by Charles, M W

Full Paper

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

G J Heyes, PhD1, A J Mill, PhD2 and M W Charles, PhD, DSc2

1 Department of Medical Physics, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham B15 2TH, 2 Radiation Biophysics Group, School of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK

Recent radiobiological studies have provided compelling evidence that the low energy X-rays as used in mammography are approximately four times – but possibly as much as six times – more effective in causing mutational damage than higher energy X-rays. Since current radiation risk estimates are based on the effects of high energy gamma radiation, this implies that the risks of radiation-induced breast cancers for mammography X-rays are underestimated by the same factor. The balance of risk and benefit for breast screening have been re-analysed for relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values between 1 and 6 for mammography X-rays. Also considered in the analysis is a change in the dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor (DDREF) from 2 to 1, women with larger than average breasts and implications for women with a family history of breast cancer. A potential increase in RBE to 6 and the adoption of a DDREF of unity does not have any impact on the breast screening programme for women aged 50–70 years screened on a 3 yearly basis. Situations for which breast screening is not justified due to the potential cancers induced relative to those detected (the detection-to-induction ratio (DIR)) are given for a range of RBE and DDREF values. It is concluded that great caution is needed if a programme of early regular screening with X-rays is to be used for women with a family history of breast cancer since DIR values are below 10 (the lowest value considered acceptable for women below 40 years) even for modest increases in the RBE for mammography X-rays.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
BJR review of the year - 2006
Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2007; 80(951): 147 - 151.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
B M Moores
Relative biological effectiveness and exposure of the female breast
Br. J. Radiol., February 1, 2007; 80(950): 141 - 142.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
G J Heyes, A J Mill, and M W Charles
Authors' reply
Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2006; 79(946): 852 - 854.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
J L Redpath and R E J Mitchel
Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme.
Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2006; 79(946): 854 - 855.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
J Law, K Faulkner, and K C Young
RBE for mammographic X-ray energies.
Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2006; 79(946): 851 - 852.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2006 by the British Institute of Radiology.