Cargando…
The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo
Candidate ionising radiation exposure biomarkers must be validated in humans exposed in vivo. Blood from patients undergoing positron emission tomography–computed tomography scan (PET-CT) and skeletal scintigraphy (scintigraphy) was drawn before (0 h) and after (2 h) the procedure for correlation an...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10356679/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37335333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00411-023-01033-4 |
_version_ | 1785075331261005824 |
---|---|
author | López-Riego, Milagrosa Płódowska, Magdalena Lis-Zajęcka, Milena Jeziorska, Kamila Tetela, Sylwia Węgierek-Ciuk, Aneta Sobota, Daniel Braziewicz, Janusz Lundholm, Lovisa Lisowska, Halina Wojcik, Andrzej |
author_facet | López-Riego, Milagrosa Płódowska, Magdalena Lis-Zajęcka, Milena Jeziorska, Kamila Tetela, Sylwia Węgierek-Ciuk, Aneta Sobota, Daniel Braziewicz, Janusz Lundholm, Lovisa Lisowska, Halina Wojcik, Andrzej |
author_sort | López-Riego, Milagrosa |
collection | PubMed |
description | Candidate ionising radiation exposure biomarkers must be validated in humans exposed in vivo. Blood from patients undergoing positron emission tomography–computed tomography scan (PET-CT) and skeletal scintigraphy (scintigraphy) was drawn before (0 h) and after (2 h) the procedure for correlation analyses of the response of selected biomarkers with radiation dose and other available patient information. FDXR, CDKN1A, BBC3, GADD45A, XPC, and MDM2 expression was determined by qRT-PCR, DNA damage (γH2AX) by flow cytometry, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels by flow cytometry using the 2′, 7′—dichlorofluorescein diacetate test in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). For ROS experiments, 0- and 2-h samples were additionally exposed to UVA to determine whether diagnostic irradiation conditioned the response to further oxidative insult. With some exceptions, radiological imaging induced weak γH2AX foci, ROS and gene expression fold changes, the latter with good coherence across genes within a patient. Diagnostic imaging did not influence oxidative stress in PBMC successively exposed to UVA. Correlation analyses with patient characteristics led to low correlation coefficient values. γH2AX fold change, which correlated positively with gene expression, presented a weak positive correlation with injected activity, indicating a radiation-induced subtle increase in DNA damage and subsequent activation of the DNA damage response pathway. The exposure discrimination potential of these biomarkers in the absence of control samples as frequently demanded in radiological emergencies, was assessed using raw data. These results suggest that the variability of the response in heterogeneous populations might complicate identifying individuals exposed to low radiation doses. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00411-023-01033-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10356679 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103566792023-07-21 The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo López-Riego, Milagrosa Płódowska, Magdalena Lis-Zajęcka, Milena Jeziorska, Kamila Tetela, Sylwia Węgierek-Ciuk, Aneta Sobota, Daniel Braziewicz, Janusz Lundholm, Lovisa Lisowska, Halina Wojcik, Andrzej Radiat Environ Biophys Original Article Candidate ionising radiation exposure biomarkers must be validated in humans exposed in vivo. Blood from patients undergoing positron emission tomography–computed tomography scan (PET-CT) and skeletal scintigraphy (scintigraphy) was drawn before (0 h) and after (2 h) the procedure for correlation analyses of the response of selected biomarkers with radiation dose and other available patient information. FDXR, CDKN1A, BBC3, GADD45A, XPC, and MDM2 expression was determined by qRT-PCR, DNA damage (γH2AX) by flow cytometry, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels by flow cytometry using the 2′, 7′—dichlorofluorescein diacetate test in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). For ROS experiments, 0- and 2-h samples were additionally exposed to UVA to determine whether diagnostic irradiation conditioned the response to further oxidative insult. With some exceptions, radiological imaging induced weak γH2AX foci, ROS and gene expression fold changes, the latter with good coherence across genes within a patient. Diagnostic imaging did not influence oxidative stress in PBMC successively exposed to UVA. Correlation analyses with patient characteristics led to low correlation coefficient values. γH2AX fold change, which correlated positively with gene expression, presented a weak positive correlation with injected activity, indicating a radiation-induced subtle increase in DNA damage and subsequent activation of the DNA damage response pathway. The exposure discrimination potential of these biomarkers in the absence of control samples as frequently demanded in radiological emergencies, was assessed using raw data. These results suggest that the variability of the response in heterogeneous populations might complicate identifying individuals exposed to low radiation doses. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00411-023-01033-4. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-06-19 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10356679/ /pubmed/37335333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00411-023-01033-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article López-Riego, Milagrosa Płódowska, Magdalena Lis-Zajęcka, Milena Jeziorska, Kamila Tetela, Sylwia Węgierek-Ciuk, Aneta Sobota, Daniel Braziewicz, Janusz Lundholm, Lovisa Lisowska, Halina Wojcik, Andrzej The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
title | The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
title_full | The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
title_fullStr | The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
title_full_unstemmed | The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
title_short | The DNA damage response to radiological imaging: from ROS and γH2AX foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
title_sort | dna damage response to radiological imaging: from ros and γh2ax foci induction to gene expression responses in vivo |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10356679/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37335333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00411-023-01033-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lopezriegomilagrosa thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT płodowskamagdalena thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT liszajeckamilena thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT jeziorskakamila thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT tetelasylwia thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT wegierekciukaneta thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT sobotadaniel thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT braziewiczjanusz thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT lundholmlovisa thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT lisowskahalina thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT wojcikandrzej thednadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT lopezriegomilagrosa dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT płodowskamagdalena dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT liszajeckamilena dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT jeziorskakamila dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT tetelasylwia dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT wegierekciukaneta dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT sobotadaniel dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT braziewiczjanusz dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT lundholmlovisa dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT lisowskahalina dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo AT wojcikandrzej dnadamageresponsetoradiologicalimagingfromrosandgh2axfociinductiontogeneexpressionresponsesinvivo |