Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 19, 2026

08:23
An Automated Microscopic Scoring Method for the γ-H2AX Foci Assay in Human Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes
Published on: December 25, 2021
5.5K
EURADOS intercomparison on emergency radiobioassay
Chunsheng Li1, Paolo Battisti2, Philippe Berard3
1Radiation Protection Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A 1C1 li.chunsheng@hc-sc.gc.ca.
Radiation Protection Dosimetry
|December 29, 2014
Summary
This study assessed radiobioassay methods for emergency response, finding most techniques accurately detect high-risk radionuclides like plutonium and americium in urine. However, gaps exist in radium-226 analysis and timely result delivery for critical medical decisions.
Area of Science:
- Radiological protection
- Environmental monitoring
- Nuclear medicine
Background:
- Emergency radiobioassay is crucial for assessing internal contamination.
- Accurate detection of radionuclides like plutonium, americium, strontium, and radium is vital for timely medical intervention.
- The European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) organized an intercomparison exercise to evaluate laboratory performance.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the performance of diverse in vitro radiobioassay methods used by nine laboratories.
- To assess the suitability of these methods for emergency situations based on established guidelines.
- To identify technical gaps and areas for improvement in radionuclide analysis.
Main Methods:
- Participants performed in vitro analysis of urine samples spiked with four high-risk radionuclides: plutonium-239, americium-241, strontium-90, and radium-226.
- Diverse analytical techniques were employed across the nine participating laboratories.
- Method sensitivity, accuracy (relative bias and precision), and turnaround time were evaluated.
Main Results:
- Most methods demonstrated sufficient sensitivity to meet emergency radiobioassay requirements, aligning with the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) Clinical Decision Guide.
- Results generally met ISO 28218 accuracy standards for relative bias and precision.
- Identified gaps include limited capability for radium-226 assay in some labs and longer-than-desired sample turnaround times.
Conclusions:
- Current radiobioassay methods are largely adequate for emergency response involving key radionuclides.
- Improvements are needed in radium-226 analysis capabilities and reducing sample processing time for faster clinical decision-making.
- Intercomparison exercises foster knowledge exchange to enhance laboratory interoperability and overall emergency preparedness.

