@article{RietjensDussortGuentheretal.2018,
  author    = {Rietjens, Ivonne M. C. M. and Dussort, P. and G{\"u}nther, Helmut and Hanlon, Paul and Honda, Hiroshi and Mally, Angela and O'Hagan, Sue and Scholz, Gabriele and Seidel, Albrecht and Swenberg, James and Teeguarden, Justin and Eisenbrand, Gerhard},
  title     = {Exposure assessment of process-related contaminants in food by biomarker monitoring},
  series = {Archives of Toxicology},
  volume    = {92},
  journal   = {Archives of Toxicology},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1007/s00204-017-2143-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-226268},
  pages     = {15-40},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Exposure assessment is a fundamental part of the risk assessment paradigm, but can often present a number of challenges and uncertainties. This is especially the case for process contaminants formed during the processing, e.g. heating of food, since they are in part highly reactive and/or volatile, thus making exposure assessment by analysing contents in food unreliable. New approaches are therefore required to accurately assess consumer exposure and thus better inform the risk assessment. Such novel approaches may include the use of biomarkers, physiologically based kinetic (PBK) modelling-facilitated reverse dosimetry, and/or duplicate diet studies. This review focuses on the state of the art with respect to the use of biomarkers of exposure for the process contaminants acrylamide, 3-MCPD esters, glycidyl esters, furan and acrolein. From the overview presented, it becomes clear that the field of assessing human exposure to process-related contaminants in food by biomarker monitoring is promising and strongly developing. The current state of the art as well as the existing data gaps and challenges for the future were defined. They include (1) using PBK modelling and duplicate diet studies to establish, preferably in humans, correlations between external exposure and biomarkers; (2) elucidation of the possible endogenous formation of the process-related contaminants and the resulting biomarker levels; (3) the influence of inter-individual variations and how to include that in the biomarker-based exposure predictions; (4) the correction for confounding factors; (5) the value of the different biomarkers in relation to exposure scenario's and risk assessment, and (6) the possibilities of novel methodologies. In spite of these challenges it can be concluded that biomarker-based exposure assessment provides a unique opportunity to more accurately assess consumer exposure to process-related contaminants in food and thus to better inform risk assessment.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DietzschBraesigkSeideletal.2022,
  author    = {Dietzsch, Stefan and Braesigk, Annett and Seidel, Clemens and Remmele, Julia and Kitzing, Ralf and Schlender, Tina and Mynarek, Martin and Geismar, Dirk and Jablonska, Karolina and Schwarz, Rudolf and Pazos, Montserrat and Weber, Damien C. and Frick, Silke and Gurtner, Kristin and Matuschek, Christiane and Harrabi, Semi Ben and Gl{\"u}ck, Albrecht and Lewitzki, Victor and Dieckmann, Karin and Benesch, Martin and Gerber, Nicolas U. and Obrecht, Denise and Rutkowski, Stefan and Timmermann, Beate and Kortmann, Rolf-Dieter},
  title     = {Types of deviation and review criteria in pretreatment central quality control of tumor bed boost in medulloblastoma—an analysis of the German Radiotherapy Quality Control Panel in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial},
  series = {Strahlentherapie und Onkologie},
  volume    = {198},
  journal   = {Strahlentherapie und Onkologie},
  number    = {3},
  issn      = {0179-7158},
  doi       = {10.1007/s00066-021-01822-0},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-307812},
  pages     = {282-290},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Purpose In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, pretreatment radiotherapy quality control (RT-QC) for tumor bed boost (TB) in non-metastatic medulloblastoma (MB) was not mandatory but was recommended for patients enrolled in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial between 2014 and 2018. This individual case review (ICR) analysis aimed to evaluate types of deviations in the initial plan proposals and develop uniform review criteria for TB boost. Patients and methods A total of 78 patients were registered in this trial, of whom a subgroup of 65 patients were available for evaluation of the TB treatment plans. Dose uniformity was evaluated according to the definitions of the protocol. Additional RT-QC criteria for standardized review of target contours were elaborated and data evaluated accordingly. Results Of 65 initial TB plan proposals, 27 (41.5\%) revealed deviations of target volume delineation. Deviations according to the dose uniformity criteria were present in 14 (21.5\%) TB plans. In 25 (38.5\%) cases a modification of the RT plan was recommended. Rejection of the TB plans was rather related to unacceptable target volume delineation than to insufficient dose uniformity. Conclusion In this analysis of pretreatment RT-QC, protocol deviations were present in a high proportion of initial TB plan proposals. These findings emphasize the importance of pretreatment RT-QC in clinical trials for MB. Based on these data, a proposal for RT-QC criteria for tumor bed boost in non-metastatic MB was developed.},
  language  = {en}
}