Summary of advantages and disadvantages of
existing and developing techniques for assessment of radiation exposure levels

Existing techniques	Advantages	Disadvantages
Dicentric assay	Low background "noise" Well calibrated Well researched >40 years experience of deployment Tested in triage mode	Limited application to internal contamination Saturates at very high doses Technically demanding
Micronucleus assay	Well calibrated Technically easier and faster throughput than the dicentric assay	Limited persistence of the signal Background precludes low dose discrimination Saturates at high doses
FISH method	Well calibrated Persistent signal	Expensive reagents Technically demanding
PCC method (Premature Chromosome Condensation)	Avoids differential cell losses in partial body exposure Results can be obtained quickly Can detect exposure to high doses	Rarely used Requires further calibration
Developing methods	Advantages	Disadvantages
γH2AX analysis	Potentially highly useful Can detect radiosensitive individuals Could provide insight into the quality of radiation	Probably requires analysis 1-2 days post-irradiation Time consuming although applicable for automation
Analysis of stable biomarkers	Could be used for analysis of long times post-irradiation Could provide insight into radiation quality	Time consuming Limited capacity for automation
Candidate protein biological dosimeters	Potentially suitable candidate proteins exist	Probably requires analysis 1-2 days post-irradiation
Genomic profiling	Potentially highly sensitive Potentially high throughput	Requires considerable further development Currently expensive technology
Proteomic profiling	Developing technology	Currently insufficiently sensitive, time consuming, and expensive

Source: adapted from
High dose radiation effects and tissue injury, Report of the Independent Advisory Group on Ionising Radiation, Table 4.4, page 41 (Public Health England [PHE], formerly Health Protection Agency [HPA], UK, March 2009) (PDF - 865 KB)