In 2011, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommended reducing the occupational equivalent dose limit for the lens of the eye from 150 mSv/year to 20 mSv/year, averaged over five years, with no single year exceeding 50 mSv. With this recommendation, several important assumptions were made, such as lack of dose rate effect, classification of cataracts as a tissue reaction with a dose threshold at 0.5 Gy, and progression of minor opacities into vision-impairing cataracts. However, although new dose thresholds and occupational dose limits have been set for radiation-induced cataract, ICRP clearly states that the recommendations are chiefly based on epidemiological evidence because there are a very small number of studies that provide explicit biological and mechanistic evidence at doses under 2 Gy. Since the release of the 2011 ICRP statement, the Multidisciplinary European Low Dose Initiative (MELODI) supported in April 2019 a scientific workshop that aimed to review epidemiological, clinical and biological evidence for radiation-induced cataracts. The purpose of this article is to present and discuss recent related epidemiological and clinical studies, ophthalmic examination techniques, biological and mechanistic knowledge, and to identify research gaps, towards the implementation of a research strategy for future studies on radiation-induced lens opacities. The authors recommend particularly to study the effect of ionizing radiation on the lens in the context of the wider, systemic effects, including in the retina, brain and other organs, and as such cataract is recommended to be studied as part of larger scale programs focused on multiple radiation health effects.

The purpose of this work was to simulate with the Monte Carlo (MC) code PENELOPE the dose distribution in lung tumours including breathing motion in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Two phantoms were modelled to simulate a pentagonal cross section with chestwall (unit density), lung (density 0.3 g cm(-3)) and two spherical tumours (unit density) of diameters respectively of 2 cm and 5 cm. The phase-space files (PSF) of four different SBRT field sizes of 6 MV from a Varian accelerator were calculated and used as beam sources to obtain both dose profiles and dose-volume histograms (DVHs) in different volumes of interest. Dose distributions were simulated for five beams impinging on the phantom. The simulations were conducted both for the static case and including the influence of respiratory motion. To reproduce the effect of breathing motion different simulations were performed keeping the beam fixed and displacing the phantom geometry in chosen positions in the cranial and caudal and left-right directions. The final result was obtained by combining the different position with two motion patterns. The MC results were compared with those obtained with three commercial treatment planning systems (TPSs), two based on the pencil beam (PB) algorithm, the TMS-HELAX (Nucletron, Sweden) and Eclipse (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA), and one based on the collapsed cone algorithm (CC), Pinnacle(3) (Philips). Some calculations were also carried out with the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) in the Eclipse system. All calculations with the TPSs were performed without simulated breathing motion, according to clinical practice. In order to compare all the TPSs and MC an absolute dose calibration in Gy/MU was performed. The analysis shows that the dose (Gy/MU) in the central part of the gross tumour volume (GTV) is calculated for both tumour sizes with an accuracy of 2-3% with PB and CC algorithms, compared to MC. At the periphery of the GTV the TPSs overestimate the dose up to 10%, while in the lung tissue close to the GTV PB algorithms overestimate the dose and the CC underestimates it. When clinically relevant breathing motions are included in the MC simulations, the static calculations with the TPSs still give a relatively accurate estimate of the dose in the GTV. On the other hand, the dose at the periphery of the GTV is overestimated, compared to the static case.

The equivalent dose limit for the eye lens for occupational exposure recommended by the ICRP has been reduced to 20 mSv y⁻¹ averaged over defined periods of 5 y, with no single year exceeding 50 mSv. The compliance with this new requirement could not be easy in some workplace such as interventional radiology and cardiology. The aim of this study is to evaluate different possible approaches in order to have a good estimate of the eye lens dose during interventional procedures. Measurements were performed with an X-ray system Philips Allura FD-10, using a PMMA phantom to simulate the patient scattered radiation and a Rando phantom to simulate the cardiologist. Thermoluminescence (TL) whole-body and TL eye lens dosemeters together with Philips DoseAware active dosemeters were located on different positions of the Rando phantom to estimate the eye lens dose in typical cardiology procedures. The results show that, for the studied conditions, any of the analysed dosemeter positions are suitable for eye lens dose assessment. However, the centre of the thyroid collar and the left ear position provide a better estimate. Furthermore, in practice, improper use of the ceiling-suspended screen can produce partial protection of some parts of the body, and thus large differences between the measured doses and the actual exposure of the eye could arise if the dosemeter is not situated close to the eye.

The exposure of the fingers is one of the major radiation protection concerns in nuclear medicine (NM). The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the exposure, dosimetry and protection of the extremities in NM. A wide range of reported finger doses were found in the literature. Historically, the highest finger doses are found at the fingertip in the preparation and dispensing of ¹⁸ F for diagnostic procedures and ⁹⁰ Y for therapeutic procedures. Doses can be significantly reduced by following recommendations on source shielding, increasing distance and training. Additionally, important trends contributing to a lower dose to the fingers are the use of automated procedures (especially for positron emission tomography (PET)) and the use of prefilled syringes. On the other hand, the workload of PET procedures has substantially increased during the last ten years. In many cases, the accuracy of dose assessment is limited by the location of the dosimeter at the base of the finger and the maximum dose at the fingertip is underestimated (typical dose ratios between 1.4 and 7). It should also be noted that not all dosimeters are sensitive to low-energy beta particles and there is a risk for underestimation of the finger dose when the detector or its filter is too thick. While substantial information has been published on the most common procedures (using ^99m Tc, ¹⁸ F and ⁹⁰ Y), less information is available for more recent applications, such as the use of ⁶⁸ Ga for PET imaging. Also, there is a need for continuous awareness with respect to contamination of the fingers, as this factor can contribute substantially to the finger dose.

In 2001, the European Radiation Dosimetry Group, EURADOS, started a working group on ‘Harmonisation of Individual Monitoring in Europe and the Dissemination of Information on New Techniques in this Field’. Within this group, one of the projects consisted of analysing the status of active personal dosemeters (APDs) in Europe. This paper reviews the regulatory requirements for APDs in 15 EU member states and summarises the main characteristics of commercial and new developments in this field. In particular, it focuses on the comparison of APD performance and standard passive dosimetry systems. Based on this information, an evaluation is initiated to establish why several countries are reluctant to accept APDs for dose records.

LiF:Mg,Cu,P is emerging as a very interesting TL material with significant advantages over the most widely accepted material, LiF:Mg,Ti. This study aims to demonstrate that some of its characteristics such as the lack of supralinearity make it useful for radiation therapy dosimetry. It has been verified that the residual signal is lower than 1.5% after an initial dose of 1 Gy and that the energy response for several high energy photon and electron beams used in radiotherapy is within ±2.5% with respect to ⁶⁰Co. A wide range of dose linearity from 0 to 10 Gy has been found for the beams considered. The influence of temperature (22(C, 45(C) during irradiation and storage is also analysed. Finally the performance of LiF:Mg,Cu,P is compared to LiF:Mg,Ti. It is shown that commercially available LiF:Mg,Cu,P is suitable for clinical applications and that some of the drawbacks reported in previous work can be overcome.