Factors Influencing Heterogeneity of Radiation-induced DNA-damage Measured by the Alkaline Comet Assay

Overview

Journal Radiat Oncol

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Oncology
Radiology

Date 2012 Apr 24

PMID 22520045

Citations 7

Authors

Clemens Seidel

Christine Lautenschlager

Jurgen Dunst

Arndt-Christian Muller

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: To investigate whether different conditions of DNA structure and radiation treatment could modify heterogeneity of response. Additionally to study variance as a potential parameter of heterogeneity for radiosensitivity testing.

Methods: Two-hundred leukocytes per sample of healthy donors were split into four groups. I: Intact chromatin structure; II: Nucleoids of histone-depleted DNA; III: Nucleoids of histone-depleted DNA with 90 mM DMSO as antioxidant. Response to single (I-III) and twice (IV) irradiation with 4 Gy and repair kinetics were evaluated using %Tail-DNA. Heterogeneity of DNA damage was determined by calculation of variance of DNA-damage (V) and mean variance (Mvar), mutual comparisons were done by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).

Results: Heterogeneity of initial DNA-damage (I, 0 min repair) increased without histones (II). Absence of histones was balanced by addition of antioxidants (III). Repair reduced heterogeneity of all samples (with and without irradiation). However double irradiation plus repair led to a higher level of heterogeneity distinguishable from single irradiation and repair in intact cells. Increase of mean DNA damage was associated with a similarly elevated variance of DNA damage (r = +0.88).

Conclusions: Heterogeneity of DNA-damage can be modified by histone level, antioxidant concentration, repair and radiation dose and was positively correlated with DNA damage. Experimental conditions might be optimized by reducing scatter of comet assay data by repair and antioxidants, potentially allowing better discrimination of small differences. Amount of heterogeneity measured by variance might be an additional useful parameter to characterize radiosensitivity.

Citing Articles

Effect of Low-Level Laser Therapy and Sinensetin (Combination therapy) on Tumor Cells (Hela) and Normal Cells (CHO).

Javaheri B, Esmaeeli Djavid G, Parivar K, Hekmat A J Lasers Med Sci. 2022; 12:e85.

PMID: 35155170 PMC: 8837833. DOI: 10.34172/jlms.2021.85.

The Effects of Mobile Phone Radiofrequency Radiation on Cochlear Stria Marginal Cells in Sprague-Dawley Rats.

Yang H, Zhang Y, Wang Z, Zhong S, Hu G, Zuo W Bioelectromagnetics. 2020; 41(3):219-229.

PMID: 32072661 PMC: 7154754. DOI: 10.1002/bem.22255.

Analysis of copy number variations induced by ultrashort electron beam radiation in human leukocytes in vitro.

Harutyunyan T, Hovhannisyan G, Sargsyan A, Grigoryan B, Al-Rikabi A, Weise A Mol Cytogenet. 2019; 12:18.

PMID: 31131024 PMC: 6524226. DOI: 10.1186/s13039-019-0433-5.

Assessment of DNA Damage After Ionizing Radiation Exposure in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Device Implantation or Atrial Fibrillation Ablation (The RADAR Study).

Turagam M, Vuddanda V, Atkins D, Venkata R, Yarlagadda B, Korra H J Atr Fibrillation. 2018; 11(2):2094.

PMID: 30505385 PMC: 6244305. DOI: 10.4022/jafib.2094.

Radioprotective effect of lactoferrin in mice exposed to sublethal X-ray irradiation.

Feng L, Li J, Qin L, Guo D, Ding H, Deng D Exp Ther Med. 2018; 16(4):3143-3148.

PMID: 30214537 PMC: 6125845. DOI: 10.3892/etm.2018.6570.

References

Louagie H, van Eijkeren M, Philippe J, Thierens H, de Ridder L . Changes in peripheral blood lymphocyte subsets in patients undergoing radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Biol. 2001; 75(6):767-71. DOI: 10.1080/095530099140113. View

Kim I, Hyun C . Comparative evaluation of the alkaline comet assay with the micronucleus test for genotoxicity monitoring using aquatic organisms. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2005; 64(3):288-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2005.05.019. View

Collins A, Dusinska M, Franklin M, Somorovska M, Petrovska H, Duthie S . Comet assay in human biomonitoring studies: reliability, validation, and applications. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1997; 30(2):139-46. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2280(1997)30:2<139::aid-em6>3.0.co;2-i. View

Olive P . Impact of the comet assay in radiobiology. Mutat Res. 2007; 681(1):13-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2007.11.001. View

Dunne A, Price M, Mothersill C, McKeown S, Robson T, Hirst D . Relationship between clonogenic radiosensitivity, radiation-induced apoptosis and DNA damage/repair in human colon cancer cells. Br J Cancer. 2003; 89(12):2277-83. PMC: 2395286. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601427. View

Betti C, Davini T, Giannessi L, Loprieno N, Barale R . Comparative studies by comet test and SCE analysis in human lymphocytes from 200 healthy subjects. Mutat Res. 1995; 343(4):201-7. DOI: 10.1016/0165-1218(95)90015-2. View

Al-Assar O, Muschel R, Mantoni T, McKenna W, Brunner T . Radiation response of cancer stem-like cells from established human cell lines after sorting for surface markers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 75(4):1216-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.001. View

Olive P, Banath J . The comet assay: a method to measure DNA damage in individual cells. Nat Protoc. 2007; 1(1):23-9. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2006.5. View

He J, Chen W, Jin L, Jin H . Comparative evaluation of the in vitro micronucleus test and the comet assay for the detection of genotoxic effects of X-ray radiation. Mutat Res. 2000; 469(2):223-31. DOI: 10.1016/s1383-5718(00)00077-2. View

10.

Singh N, Stephens R, Schneider E . Modifications of alkaline microgel electrophoresis for sensitive detection of DNA damage. Int J Radiat Biol. 1994; 66(1):23-8. DOI: 10.1080/09553009414550911. View

11.

Kuechler A, Neubauer S, Grabenbauer G, Claussen U, Liehr T, Sauer R . Is 24-color FISH detection of in-vitro radiation-induced chromosomal aberrations suited to determine individual intrinsic radiosensitivity?. Strahlenther Onkol. 2002; 178(4):209-15. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-002-0904-0. View

12.

Rosenberger A, Rossler U, Hornhardt S, Sauter W, Bickeboller H, Wichmann H . Validation of a fully automated COMET assay: 1.75 million single cells measured over a 5 year period. DNA Repair (Amst). 2011; 10(3):322-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2010.12.003. View

13.

Falbo K, Alabert C, Katou Y, Wu S, Han J, Wehr T . Involvement of a chromatin remodeling complex in damage tolerance during DNA replication. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2009; 16(11):1167-72. PMC: 2974178. DOI: 10.1038/nsmb.1686. View

14.

Bright J, Aylott M, Bate S, Geys H, Jarvis P, Saul J . Recommendations on the statistical analysis of the Comet assay. Pharm Stat. 2011; 10(6):485-93. DOI: 10.1002/pst.530. View

15.

Olive P, Banath J, Durand R . Detection of subpopulations resistant to DNA-damaging agents in spheroids and murine tumours. Mutat Res. 1997; 375(2):157-65. DOI: 10.1016/s0027-5107(97)00011-0. View

16.

Hu Q, Kavanagh M, Newcombe D, Hill R . Detection of hypoxic fractions in murine tumors by comet assay: comparison with other techniques. Radiat Res. 1995; 144(3):266-75. View

17.

Anderson D, Plewa M . The International Comet Assay Workshop. Mutagenesis. 1998; 13(1):67-73. DOI: 10.1093/mutage/13.1.67. View

18.

Rzeszowska-Wolny J, Palyvoda O, Polanska J, Wygoda A, Hancock R . Relationships between acute reactions to radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients and parameters of radiation-induced DNA damage and repair in their lymphocytes. Int J Radiat Biol. 2008; 84(8):635-42. DOI: 10.1080/09553000802087041. View

19.

Rojas E, Lopez M, Valverde M . Single cell gel electrophoresis assay: methodology and applications. J Chromatogr B Biomed Sci Appl. 1999; 722(1-2):225-54. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-4347(98)00313-2. View

20.

Mughal A, Vikram A, Ramarao P, Jena G . Micronucleus and comet assay in the peripheral blood of juvenile rat: establishment of assay feasibility, time of sampling and the induction of DNA damage. Mutat Res. 2010; 700(1-2):86-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2010.05.014. View