Literature DB >> 11139598

Inclusion of micronuclei in non-divided mononuclear lymphocytes and necrosis/apoptosis may provide a more comprehensive cytokinesis block micronucleus assay for biomonitoring purposes.

M Kirsch-Volders1, M Fenech.   

Abstract

Human biomonitoring of early genetic effects requires accurate, sensitive and, if possible, easy and not too time-consuming methodologies to assess mutations. One of the most promising methodologies at the present time is the cytokinesis block micronucleus (MN) assay (CBMN), which detects both chromosome breakage and chromosome loss in once-divided binucleated (BN) cells. Many studies have been published with this methodology, but before its extensive application is recommended, it is necessary to evaluate its strengths and limitations. Recently, Fenech et al. reviewed the advantages of the CBMN assay for biomonitoring purposes. However, up to now information present in mononucleated (MONO) cells has rarely been taken into account, although it might be complementary to that assessed in BN cells. Indeed, MONO cells should indicate damage which was present in vivo before the start of culture and BN cells may contain pre-existing micronuclei (MNi) plus lesions which are expressed as MNi during in vitro culture. To address this question, the objectives of this paper were as follows. (i) To situate the CBMN assay in a historical and mechanistic perspective. (ii) To consider whether impaired mitotic capacity in vitro may be responsible for false negative biomonitoring studies if MN in MONO cells are not taken into account in the CBMN test. The following factors were considered: division delay for repair and mitotic block, in vitro apoptosis and necrosis of damaged cells, mitotic slippage and correlation between MN expression in vitro versus in vivo. (iii) To analyse the factors which may cause a negative result in the CBMN assay in biomonitoring when exposure to specific genotoxins is evident. The specific effects of aneugens and of adaptive responses to chronic low level exposure were examined. (iv) To compare the sensitivity of MONO and BN cells in relation to the genotoxic mechanism. (v) To propose an adequate sampling scheme to study MN in both MONO and BN cells. It was concluded that a more comprehensive assessment of DNA damage may be achieved if the CBMN assay includes measures of: (i) MNi in MONO cells; (ii) MNi in BN cells; (iii) apoptotic cells; (iv) necrotic cells. It is probable that the 24 h post-phytohaemagglutinin time point may be the optimal time to assess the frequency of MNi in MONO cells, apoptotic cells and necrotic cells. It is also practical to include these measures when scoring MNi in BN cells after cytokinesis block.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11139598     DOI: 10.1093/mutage/16.1.51

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutagenesis        ISSN: 0267-8357            Impact factor:   3.000


  15 in total

1.  Resolution of anaphase bridges in cancer cells.

Authors:  Diane R Hoffelder; Li Luo; Nancy A Burke; Simon C Watkins; Susanne M Gollin; William S Saunders
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  2004-05-20       Impact factor: 4.316

2.  Cytokinesis-blocked micronucleus cytome assay biomarkers identify lung cancer cases amongst smokers.

Authors:  Randa A El-Zein; Michael Fenech; Mirtha S Lopez; Margaret R Spitz; Carol J Etzel
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  A Framework for Comparative Evaluation of Dosimetric Methods to Triage a Large Population Following a Radiological Event.

Authors:  Ann Barry Flood; Roberto J Nicolalde; Eugene Demidenko; Benjamin B Williams; Alla Shapiro; Albert L Wiley; Harold M Swartz
Journal:  Radiat Meas       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 1.898

4.  Use of EPR and FTIR to detect biological effects of ultrasound and microbubbles on a fibroblast cell line.

Authors:  D Pozzi; P Fattibene; D Viscomi; L Di Giambattista; P Grimaldi; I Udroiu; A Bedini; C Giliberti; R Palomba; A Congiu Castellano
Journal:  Eur Biophys J       Date:  2011-08-25       Impact factor: 1.733

5.  Genotoxicity surveillance programme in workers dismantling World War I chemical ammunition.

Authors:  R A Mateuca; C Carton; M Roelants; S Roesems; D Lison; M Kirsch-Volders
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2010-03-20       Impact factor: 3.015

Review 6.  Cytogenetic perspective of ageing and longevity in men and women.

Authors:  E Zietkiewicz; A Wojda; M Witt
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Genistein protects against biomarkers of delayed lung sequelae in mice surviving high-dose total body irradiation.

Authors:  Regina M Day; Michal Barshishat-Kupper; Steven R Mog; Elizabeth A McCart; P G S Prasanna; Thomas A Davis; Michael R Landauer
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2008-04-23       Impact factor: 2.724

8.  Maternal and gestational factors and micronucleus frequencies in umbilical blood: the NewGeneris Rhea cohort in Crete.

Authors:  Kim Vande Loock; Eleni Fthenou; Ilse Decordier; Georgia Chalkiadaki; Maria Keramarou; Gina Plas; Mathieu Roelants; Jos Kleinjans; Leda Chatzi; Franco Merlo; Manolis Kogevinas; Micheline Kirsch-Volders
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Development of reconstructed intestinal micronucleus cytome (RICyt) assay in 3D human gut model for genotoxicity assessment of orally ingested substances.

Authors:  Hui Kheng Lim; Christopher Owen Hughes; Michelle Jing Sin Lim; Jia'En Jasmine Li; Moumita Rakshit; Calvin Yeo; Kern Rei Chng; Angela Li; Joanne Sheot Harn Chan; Kee Woei Ng; David Ian Leavesley; Benjamin Paul Chapman Smith
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 6.168

10.  Predictive cytogenetic biomarkers for colorectal neoplasia in medium risk patients.

Authors:  E M Ionescu; T Nicolaie; M A Ionescu; G Becheanu; F Andrei; M Diculescu; M Ciocirlan
Journal:  J Med Life       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.