Journal Article10.1016/j.lssr.2023.08.003
Non-targeted effects and space radiation risks for astronauts on multiple International Space Station and lunar missions
Francis A. Cucinotta
3
TL;DR: Non-targeted effects increase cancer risks by about 2.3 fold and circulatory risks increase mortality estimates by 25%-37%.
read more
Abstract: Future space travel to the earth's moon or the planet Mars will likely lead to the selection of experienced International Space Station (ISS) or lunar crew persons for subsequent lunar or mars missions. Major concerns for space travel are galactic cosmic ray (GCR) risks of cancer and circulatory diseases. However large uncertainties in risk prediction occur due to the quantitative and qualitative differences in heavy ion microscopic energy deposition leading to differences in biological effects compared to low LET radiation. In addition, there are sparse radiobiology data and absence of epidemiology data for heavy ions and other high LET radiation. Non-targeted effects (NTEs) are found in radiobiology studies to increase the biological effectiveness of high LET radiation at low dose for cancer related endpoints. In this paper the most recent version of the NASA Space Cancer Risk model (NSCR-2022) is used to predict mission risks while considering NTEs in solid cancer risk predictions. I discuss predictions of space radiation risks of cancer and circulatory disease mortality for US Whites and US Asian-Pacific Islander (API) populations for 6-month ISS, 80-day lunar missions, and combined ISS-lunar mission. Model predictions suggest NTE increase cancer risks by about ∼2.3 fold over a model that ignores NTEs. US API are predicted to have a lower cancer risks of about 30% compared to US Whites. Cancer risks are slightly less than additive for multiple missions, which is due to the decease of risk with age of exposure and the increased competition with background risks as radiation risks increase. The inclusion of circulatory risks increases mortality estimates about 25% and 37% for females and males, respectively in the model ignoring NTEs, and 20% and 30% when NTEs are assumed to modify solid cancer risk. The predictions made here for combined ISS and lunar missions suggest risks are within risk limit recommendations by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) for such missions.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
Health hazards posed by ionizing radiation to human space missions and newly developing methodologies to investigate them
Franco Ferrari,Ewa Szuszkiewicz +1 more
TL;DR: It is argued that the use of the so-called 3D models or organoids could be a good candidate of such a strategy that will be complementary to in vitro 2D models and animal models, and that new strategies are necessary in order to predict the insurgence of stochastic effects.
Organ Dose Equivalents of Albedo Protons and Neutrons Under Exposure to Large Solar Particle Events during Lunar Human Landing Missions
Sungmin Pak,Francis A. Cucinotta +1 more
<scp>AOP</scp> report: Development of an adverse outcome pathway for deposition of energy leading to abnormal vascular remodeling
Tatiana Kozbenko,Nadine Adam,Veronica S. Grybas,Benjamin J. Smith,Dalya Alomar,Robyn Hocking,Janna AbdelAziz,Amanda Pace,Marjan Boerma,Omid Azimzadeh,Steve R. Blattnig,Nobuyuki Hamada,Carole L. Yauk,Ruth C. Wilkins,Vinita Chauhan +14 more
TL;DR: This study develops an adverse outcome pathway (AOP) for abnormal vascular remodeling caused by energy deposition, identifying key events and knowledge gaps in understanding the effects of low-dose radiation and microgravity on the cardiovascular system.
References
Biological effects in unirradiated human tissue induced by radiation damage up to 1 mm away.
Oleg V. Belyakov,Stephen Mitchell,Deep Parikh,Gerhard Randers-Pehrson,Stephen A. Marino,Sally A. Amundson,Charles R. Geard,David J. Brenner +7 more
TL;DR: The surprisingly long range of bystander signals in human tissue suggests that bystander responses may be important in extrapolating radiation risk estimates from epidemiologically accessible doses down to very low doses where nonhit bystander cells will predominate.