Back to the USUHS home page
 
Biodosimetry: Tools

Emergency Response Resources
Advisory team
Other resources

Guidance for Managing
Radiation Casualties

POLICIES
Depleted uranium (193-kb PDF)
Potassium iodide (106-kb PDF)
Prussian blue (124-kb PDF)
PUBLICATIONS
Emergency radiation
  medicine response
(55-kb PDF)
Management of
  radiological casualties
(793-kb PDF)
Plan: Response to a
  nuclear detonation
(870-kb PDF)
Quick reference: NCRP
  recommendations
(66-kb PDF)
Textbook: Consequences
  of nuclear warfare


Medical Effects of
Ionizing Radiation

Course description
Schedule, fees, registration
Course resources

Products: Quick List
Exposure assessment tools
Forms
Guidance
Publications
Books/book chapters
Contract reports/films
Journal articles/supplements
Reports/report chapters
Scientific reports
Special publications
Technical reports

Register AFRRI Products

Research: Programs
• Biological dosimetry
• Radiation injury combined
   with other trauma

• Internal contamination
   and metal toxicity

• Radiation countermeasures

Seminars: Schedule

USU Graduate
Education
:
Radiation Biology
You are here:  HOME  >  Research Programs  >  Radiation Countermeasures
Radiation Countermeasures
Jump to:  Background | Summary of accomplishments | Previous work at AFRRI | Recent accomplishments
Overview
Program advisor: Mark H. Whitnall, PhD
Mission: To develop pharmacological countermeasures to radiation injury that can be used by military personnel and emergency responders.
Strategic plan
  • Develop a better understanding of the biology of radiation injury and radiation countermeasure drugs.
  • Use knowledge of processes involved in radiation injury and countermeasures to identify and assess novel drug candidates.
  • Collaborate proactively with other research institutions, pharmaceutical firms, and government agencies to develop and obtain approval for radiation countermeasures for use in the field and the clinic.
Background
  • Ionizing radiation at certain doses damages the blood-forming system.
  • This results in fewer blood cells and platelets in the circulatory system.
  • White blood cells form part of the immune system: they attack infectious microorganisms. Platelets form clots and prevent uncontrolled bleeding.
  • Therefore, susceptibility to infection and hemorrhage increase after exposure to radiation.
  • These can cause death at a certain range of radiation doses (hematopoietic syndrome). Higher radiation doses cause death by damaging the gastrointestinal (GI) system or the central nervous system. There is some overlap: mortality due to the hematopoietic syndrome can be exacerbated by compromise of the GI barrier to bacteria.
  • Lower doses of radiation can increase the probability of cancer. (The probability of late effects such as cancer would also increase after higher radiation doses, in people who survived the acute effects.)
  • Possible countermeasures to ionizing radiation can be broadly categorized into three groups.
    1. Drugs that prevent the initial radiation injury
      • Free radical antioxidants
      • Hypoxia
      • Enzymatic detoxification
      • Oncogene targeting agents
    2. Drugs that repair the molecular damage caused by radiation
      • Hydrogen transfer
      • Enzymatic repair
    3. Drugs that stimulate proliferation of surviving stem and progenitor cells
      • Immunomodulators
      • Growth factors and cytokines
  • Military personnel and emergency responders urgently need nontoxic countermeasures to ionizing radiation.
  • The only approved countermeasures that can be used in the field are drugs that block the effects of several specific internalized radioisotopes. There are no approved drugs that can be used outside the clinic to ameliorate the effects of external ionizing radiation on the blood-forming or GI systems.
  • The availability of medical facilities for radiation casualties after a nuclear detonation near a city will be problematic:
    1. Bell WC, Dallas CE. 2007. Intl J Health Geographics 6:5
    2. British Medical Association's Board of Science and Education. 1983, The Medical Effects of Nuclear War, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
    3. Holdstock D, Waterston L. 2000. Lancet 355:1544–1547
    4. Flynn DF, Goans RE. 2006. Surg Clin North Am 86:601–636
  • In light of the logistical realities of likely nuclear disaster scenarios, much of our current focus is on drug candidates with extremely low toxicity and ease of administration, suitable for use outside the clinic without physician supervision.
TOP OF PAGE  
Summary of accomplishments
  • Radiation countermeasure candidates tested for efficacy at AFRRI are chosen based on extensive basic research, which increases chances of success.
  • All four countermeasures for acute radiation syndrome with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Investigational New Drug (IND) status are AFRRI products.
  • Two (5-AED and BIO-300) were conceived, initiated, and developed at AFRRI.
  • The two others (Ex-Rad and CBLB502) were the subjects of company-initiated research programs that AFRRI joined at early stages.
  • A fifth candidate, which AFRRI is researching in collaboration with a company, will be the subject of an IND application in the near future.
  • The current standard (off-label) treatment for acute radiation syndrome, hematopoietic cytokines such as G-CSF, was conceived, initiated, and developed at AFRRI.
  • AFRRI has an ongoing in vivo efficacy screening program and is frequently approached by organizations for research collaboration and/or consultation regarding their promising countermeasure candidates.
  • The screening program is supplemented by a robust mechanistic research program that provides supporting data for approval of existing drugs and identifies potential drug targets.
  • AFRRI has a history of collaborating with private companies, providing supporting data for FDA applications, and attending meetings with the FDA and other government agencies as appropriate.
Previous work at AFRRI
AFRRI researchers have examined the efficacy, toxicity, and mechanisms of a number of radiation countermeasure candidates over the years. Three lines of investigation in particular have strongly influenced current practice:
TOP OF PAGE  
Recent accomplishments
Marrow treated with F-AED Marrow treated with a placebo
Bone marrow from a mouse treated with 5-AED (left), compared with marrow from a mouse treated with placebo (right). The many small, round, dark objects in the control section are nuclei in progenitors of red blood cells. Progenitors of granulocytes (mostly neutrophils) and monocytes possess lighter nuclei, often horseshoe-shaped. Four days after 5-AED treatment, there was a proliferation of granulocyte/monocyte progenitors.
TOP OF PAGE  
TOP OF PAGE