Radiation injury treatment network (RITN): healthcare professionals preparing for a mass casualty radiological or nuclear incident

Radiation-induced multi-organ injury

PURPOSE

Natural history studies have been informative in dissecting radiation injury, isolating its effects, and compartmentalizing injury based on the extent of exposure and the elapsed time post-irradiation. Although radiation injury models are useful for investigating the mechanism of action in isolated subsyndromes and development of medical countermeasures (MCMs), it is clear that ionizing radiation exposure leads to multi-organ injury (MOI).

METHODS

The Radiation and Nuclear Countermeasures Program within the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases partnered with the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority to convene a virtual two-day meeting titled 'Radiation-Induced Multi-Organ Injury' on June 7-8, 2022. Invited subject matter experts presented their research findings in MOI, including study of mechanisms and possible MCMs to address complex radiation-induced injuries.

RESULTS

This workshop report summarizes key information from each presentation and discussion by the speakers and audience participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the mechanisms that lead to radiation-induced MOI is critical to advancing candidate MCMs that could mitigate the injury and reduce associated morbidity and mortality. The observation that some of these mechanisms associated with MOI include systemic injuries, such as inflammation and vascular damage, suggests that MCMs that address systemic pathways could be effective against multiple organ systems.

Radiation Injuries

Radiation-related injuries are rare. Yet the consequences of an event involving a radiation source can be substantial. As with any clinical emergency that rarely occurs, we are typically less prepared to deal with the situation. Compounding the crisis will be the "worried well" population who may believe that they too are contaminated or suffering from radiation poisoning and report to the hospital for evaluation. Identifying and triaging those who are sick or injured, managing the surge of patients, and knowing where resources can be accessed are all essential.

Use of Growth Factors and Other Cytokines for Treatment of Injuries During a Radiation Public Health Emergency

Due to the threat of a radiological or nuclear incident that could impact citizens, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services tasked the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) with identifying and funding early- to mid-stage medical countermeasure (MCM) development to treat radiation-induced injuries. Given that the body's natural response to radiation exposure includes production of growth factors and cytokines, and that the only drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat acute radiation syndrome are growth factors targeting either the granulocyte (Neupogen^® or Neulasta^®) or granulocyte and macrophage (Leukine^®) hematopoietic cell lineages, there is interest in understanding the role that these factors play in responding to and/or ameliorating radiation damage. Furthermore, in an environment where resources are scarce, such as what might be expected during a radiation public health emergency, availability of growth factor or other treatments may be limited. For these reasons, the NIAID partnered with the Radiation Injury Treatment Network (RITN), whose membership includes medical centers with expertise in the management of bone marrow failure, to explore the use of growth factors and other cytokines as MCMs to mitigate/treat radiation injuries. A workshop was convened that included government, industry and academic subject matter experts, with presentations covering the anticipated concept of operations during a mass casualty incident including triage and treatment, growth factors under development for a radiation indication, and how the practice of medicine can inform other potential approaches, as well as considerations for administration of these products to diverse civilian populations. This report reviews the information presented, and provides an overview of the discussions from a guided breakout session.

Preparedness Is More Than a Plan: Medical Considerations for Radiation Response

The goals herein are to describe and discuss existing plans for the medical preparedness and response to a radiological incident/nuclear detonation, present the systems approach to nuclear response, introduce methods to assess operational capabilities, and posit suggestions for the way forward to implementation. This discussion seeks to review where these U.S. government efforts began 10 y ago, then moves through the collective National progress in preparedness planning for an improvised nuclear device detonation and differentiates between important preparedness planning efforts and the challenges of understanding national implementation. Finally, a way forward for the immediate future is suggested.

Opportunity for Collaboration Between Radiation Injury Treatment Network Centers and Medical Toxicology Specialists

OBJECTIVES

The Radiation Injury Treatment Network (RITN) comprises >50 centers across the United States that are poised to care for victims of a radiation emergency. The network is organized around bone marrow transplant centers because these facilities excel in both radiation medicine and the care of patients with severe bone marrow depression. A radiation emergency may cause not only irradiation from an external source but also internal contamination with radioactive material. Because medical toxicologists are trained in radiation injury management and have expertise in the management of internal contamination, RITN centers may benefit from partnerships with medical toxicology resources, which may be located at academic medical centers, hospital inpatient clinical services, outpatient clinics, or poison control centers.

METHODS

We determined the locations of existing RITN centers and assessed their proximity to various medical toxicology resources, including medical toxicology fellowship programs, inpatient toxicology services, outpatient toxicology clinics, and poison control centers. Data were derived from publicly available Internet sources in March 2015.

RESULTS

The majority of RITN centers do not have a medical toxicology fellowship, an inpatient toxicology service, or an outpatient toxicology clinic within the same institution. Fifty-seven percent of RITN centers have at least one of these resources located in the same city, however, and 73% of centers have at least one of these resources or a poison control center within the same city. Ninety-five percent of RITN centers have at least one medical toxicology resource within the state.

CONCLUSIONS

Most RITN centers are located in the same city as at least one medical toxicology resource. Establishing relationships between RITN centers and medical toxicologists needs to be explored further.

Disaster Preparedness and Response for the Burn Mass Casualty Incident in the Twenty-first Century

The effective and efficient coordination of emergent patient care at the point of injury followed by the systematic resource-based triage of casualties are the most critical factors that influence patient outcomes after mass casualty incidents (MCIs). The effectiveness and appropriateness of implemented actions are largely determined by the extent and efficacy of the planning and preparation that occur before the MCI. The goal of this work was to define the essential efforts related to planning, preparation, and execution of acute and subacute medical care for disaster burn casualties. This type of MCI is frequently referred to as a burn MCI."

Cellular Therapies for Treatment of Radiation Injury: Report from a NIH/NIAID and IRSN Workshop

In recent years, there has been increasing concern over the possibility of a radiological or nuclear incident occurring somewhere in the world. Intelligence agencies frequently report that terrorist groups and rogue nations are seeking to obtain radiological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction. In addition, there exists the real possibility that safety of nuclear power reactors could be compromised by natural (such as the tsunami and subsequent Fukushima accident in Japan in March, 2011) or accidental (Three Mile Island, 1979 and Chernobyl, 1986) events. Although progress has been made by governments around the world to prepare for these events, including the stockpiling of radiation countermeasures, there are still challenges concerning care of patients injured during a radiation incident. Because the deleterious and pathological effects of radiation are so broad, it is desirable to identify medical countermeasures that can have a beneficial impact on several tissues and organ systems. Cellular therapies have the potential to impact recovery and tissue/organ regeneration for both early and late complications of radiation exposure. These therapies, which could include stem or blood progenitor cells, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) or cells derived from other tissues (e.g., endothelium or placenta), have shown great promise in treating other nonradiation injuries to and diseases of the bone marrow, skin, gastrointestinal tract, brain, lung and heart. To explore the potential use of these therapies in the treatment of victims after acute radiation exposure, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases co-sponsored an international workshop in July, 2015 in Paris, France with the Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire. The workshop included discussions of data available from testing in preclinical models of radiation injury to different organs, logistics associated with the practical use of cellular therapies for a mass casualty incident, as well as international regulatory requirements for authorizing such drug products to be legally and readily used in such incidents. This report reviews the data presented, as well as key discussion points from the meeting.

Maggot Debridement Therapy in Disaster Medicine

BACKGROUND

When disaster strikes, the number of patients requiring treatment can be overwhelming. In low-income countries, resources to assist the injured in a timely fashion may be limited. As a consequence, necrosis and wound infection in disaster patients is common and frequently leads to adverse health outcomes such as amputations, chronic wounds, and loss of life. In such compromised health care environments, low-tech and cheap wound care options are required that are in ready supply, easy to use, and have multiple therapeutic benefits. Maggot debridement therapy (MDT) is one such wound care option and may prove to be an invaluable tool in the treatment of wounds post-disaster.

DISCUSSION

This report provides an overview of the wound burden experienced in various types of disaster, followed by a discussion of current treatment approaches, and the role MDT may play in the treatment of complex wounds in challenging health care conditions. Maggot debridement therapy removes necrotic and devitalized tissue, controls wound infection, and stimulates wound healing. These properties suggest that medicinal maggots could assist health care professionals in the debridement of disaster wounds, to control or prevent infection, and to prepare the wound bed for reconstructive surgery. Maggot debridement therapy-assisted wound care would be led by health care workers rather than physicians, which would allow the latter to focus on reconstructive and other surgical interventions. Moreover, MDT could provide a larger window for time-critical interventions, such as fasciotomies to treat compartment syndrome and amputations in case of life-threatening wound infection.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There are social, medical, and logistic hurdles to overcome before MDT can become widely available in disaster medical aid. Thus, research is needed to further demonstrate the utility of MDT in Disaster Medicine. There is also a need for reliable MDT logistics and supply chain networks. Integration with other disaster management activities will also be essential.

CONCLUSIONS

In the aftermath of disasters, MDT could play an important role facilitating timely and efficient medical treatment and improving patient outcomes. Existing social, medical, and logistic barriers will need to be overcome for MDT to be mainstreamed in Disaster Medicine.

Public health and medical preparedness for a nuclear detonation: the nuclear incident medical enterprise

Resilience and the ability to mitigate the consequences of a nuclear incident are enhanced by (1) effective planning, preparation and training; (2) ongoing interaction, formal exercises, and evaluation among the sectors involved; (3) effective and timely response and communication; and (4) continuous improvements based on new science, technology, experience, and ideas. Public health and medical planning require a complex, multi-faceted systematic approach involving federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial governments; private sector organizations; academia; industry; international partners; and individual experts and volunteers. The approach developed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Nuclear Incident Medical Enterprise (NIME) is the result of efforts from government and nongovernment experts. It is a "bottom-up" systematic approach built on the available and emerging science that considers physical infrastructure damage, the spectrum of injuries, a scarce resources setting, the need for decision making in the face of a rapidly evolving situation with limited information early on, timely communication, and the need for tools and just-in-time information for responders who will likely be unfamiliar with radiation medicine and uncertain and overwhelmed in the face of the large number of casualties and the presence of radioactivity. The components of NIME can be used to support planning for, response to, and recovery from the effects of a nuclear incident. Recognizing that it is a continuous work-in-progress, the current status of the public health and medical preparedness and response for a nuclear incident is provided.

Engagement and education: care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Engagement and education of ICU clinicians in disaster preparedness is fragmented by time constraints and institutional barriers and frequently occurs during a disaster. We reviewed the existing literature from 2007 to April 2013 and expert opinions about clinician engagement and education for critical care during a pandemic or disaster and offer suggestions for integrating ICU clinicians into planning and response. The suggestions in this article are important for all of those involved in a pandemic or large-scale disaster with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed and suggestions formulated according to the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) Consensus Statement development methodology. We assessed articles, documents, reports, and gray literature reported since 2007. Following expert-informed sorting and review of the literature, key priority areas and questions were developed. No studies of sufficient quality were identified upon which to make evidence-based recommendations. Therefore, the panel developed expert opinion-based suggestions using a modified Delphi process.

RESULTS

Twenty-three suggestions were formulated based on literature-informed consensus opinion. These suggestions are grouped according to the following thematic elements: (1) situational awareness, (2) clinician roles and responsibilities, (3) education, and (4) community engagement. Together, these four elements are considered to form the basis for effective ICU clinician engagement for mass critical care.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal engagement of the ICU clinical team in caring for large numbers of critically ill patients due to a pandemic or disaster will require a departure from the routine independent systems operating in hospitals. An effective response will require robust information systems; coordination among clinicians, hospitals, and governmental organizations; pre-event engagement of relevant stakeholders; and standardized core competencies for the education and training of critical care clinicians.

A phase 1 trial of eltrombopag in patients undergoing stem cell transplantation after total body irradiation

Stem cell transplantation can be associated with significant periods of thrombocytopenia, necessitating platelet transfusions and contributing to the risk of bleeding. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists have been shown to enhance platelet counts in other clinical settings, and so a phase 1 clinical trial was conducted to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and maximum tolerated dose of once-daily eltrombopag in patients undergoing stem cell transplantation with conditioning regimens containing total body irradiation ≥400 cGy. Eltrombopag was examined at dosage levels of 75, 150, 225, and 300 mg given orally once daily for 27 days, starting at 24 to 48 hours post-transplantation. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed over a 24-hour period after the first dose of eltrombopag, as well as during the second week of treatment (steady-state). Nineteen patients were enrolled, 15 of whom completed protocol treatments. Three patients completed each dose level up to 225 mg, and 6 completed treatment at the highest dose of 300 mg. Four patients were replaced because drug compliance was <75% of planned doses. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in this heterogeneous post-transplantation patient population. Common adverse events were related to standard stem cell transplantation. One episode of pulmonary embolus occurred 9 days after discontinuation of eltrombopag, and the only other thromboembolic episode was a grade 2 catheter-related clot. We conclude that up to 27 days of once-daily dosing of eltrombopag after stem cell transplantation is well tolerated.