BACKGROUND: p53 protein plays an important role in the response to DNA damage, and radiotherapy can cause radiation dermatitis. p53 and p21 levels increase in vitro when DNA is damaged by UVA, UVB, or gamma-radiation. To determine whether this response occurs in human skin and predicts the level of radiation dermatitis, we investigated levels of p53 and p21 in skin exposed to different types of radiation as part of a randomized study of women with breast cancer to evaluate topical steroid or emollient cream treatments for radiation dermatitis of their irradiated breast. METHODS: After surgery but before receiving tangential 5-mV photo-beam radiotherapy (2 Gy and 54 Gy) to the affected breast parenchyma, multiple areas on the backs of 50 women were irradiated with UVA and other areas were irradiated with UVB. Skin biopsy samples were taken from areas of normal unirradiated skin and all irradiated areas, and p53 and p21 were detected immunohistochemically. All statistical tests are two-sided. RESULTS: In skin irradiated with UVA or UVB, medians of 4.4% (range = 0%-40.5%) or 45.5% (range = 5.3%-74.6%) p53-positive keratinocytes, respectively, were observed. Radiotherapy produced medians of 31.0% (range = 0%-79.3%) p53-immunoreactive cells after 2 Gy of radiation and 83.2% (range = 37.6%-95.2%) after 54 Gy of radiation. Despite large interindividual differences in p53 response, comparable increases in epidermal p53 response were independent of the type of radiation. A correlation between p53 and p21 was also evident (r(s) =.78). In breast skin, there was no association between the p53 response and the degree of erythema (a measure of radiation dermatitis) and no statistically significant difference between treatment arms and p21/p53 responses. CONCLUSIONS: Individual responses to radiation-induced DNA damage varied widely and may be independent of the type of radiation. The epidermal p53 response does not predict the degree of radiation dermatitis.
BACKGROUND:p53 protein plays an important role in the response to DNA damage, and radiotherapy can cause radiation dermatitis. p53 and p21 levels increase in vitro when DNA is damaged by UVA, UVB, or gamma-radiation. To determine whether this response occurs in human skin and predicts the level of radiation dermatitis, we investigated levels of p53 and p21 in skin exposed to different types of radiation as part of a randomized study of women with breast cancer to evaluate topical steroid or emollient cream treatments for radiation dermatitis of their irradiated breast. METHODS: After surgery but before receiving tangential 5-mV photo-beam radiotherapy (2 Gy and 54 Gy) to the affected breast parenchyma, multiple areas on the backs of 50 women were irradiated with UVA and other areas were irradiated with UVB. Skin biopsy samples were taken from areas of normal unirradiated skin and all irradiated areas, and p53 and p21 were detected immunohistochemically. All statistical tests are two-sided. RESULTS: In skin irradiated with UVA or UVB, medians of 4.4% (range = 0%-40.5%) or 45.5% (range = 5.3%-74.6%) p53-positive keratinocytes, respectively, were observed. Radiotherapy produced medians of 31.0% (range = 0%-79.3%) p53-immunoreactive cells after 2 Gy of radiation and 83.2% (range = 37.6%-95.2%) after 54 Gy of radiation. Despite large interindividual differences in p53 response, comparable increases in epidermal p53 response were independent of the type of radiation. A correlation between p53 and p21 was also evident (r(s) =.78). In breast skin, there was no association between the p53 response and the degree of erythema (a measure of radiation dermatitis) and no statistically significant difference between treatment arms and p21/p53 responses. CONCLUSIONS: Individual responses to radiation-induced DNA damage varied widely and may be independent of the type of radiation. The epidermal p53 response does not predict the degree of radiation dermatitis.
Authors: Taija M Af Hällström; Hongjuan Zhao; Junqiang Tian; Ville Rantanen; Stephen W Reese; Rosalie Nolley; Marikki Laiho; Donna M Peehl Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-09-11 Impact factor: 7.450