Literature DB >> 12856953

Radiation-induced versus endogenous DNA damage: possible effect of inducible protective responses in mitigating endogenous damage.

Myron Pollycove1, Ludwig E Feinendegen.   

Abstract

Ionizing radiation (IR) causes damage to DNA that is apparently proportional to absorbed dose. The incidence of radiation-induced cancer in humans unequivocally rises with the value of absorbed doses above about 300 mGy, in a seemingly linear fashion. Extrapolation of this linear correlation down to zero-dose constitutes the linear-no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis of radiation-induced cancer incidence. The corresponding dose-risk correlation, however, is questionable at doses lower than 300 mGy. Non-radiation induced DNA damage and, in consequence, oncogenic transformation in non-irradiated cells arises from a variety of sources, mainly from weak endogenous carcinogens such as reactive oxygen species (ROS) as well as from micronutrient deficiencies and environmental toxins. In order to relate the low probability of radiation-induced cancer to the relatively high incidence of non-radiation carcinogenesis, especially at low-dose irradiation, the quantitative and qualitative differences between the DNA damages from non-radiation and radiation sources need to be addressed and put into context of physiological mechanisms of cellular protection. This paper summarizes a co-operative approach by the authors to answer the questions on the quantitative and qualitative DNA damages from non-radiation sources, largely endogenous ROS, and following exposure to low doses of IR. The analysis relies on published data and justified assumptions and considers the physiological capacity of mammalian cells to protect themselves constantly by preventing and repairing DNA damage. Furthermore, damaged cells are susceptible to removal by apoptosis or the immune system. The results suggest that the various forms of non-radiation DNA damage in tissues far outweigh corresponding DNA damage from low-dose radiation exposure at the level of, and well above, background radiation. These data are examined within the context of low-dose radiation induction of cellular signaling that may stimulate cellular protection systems over hours to weeks against accumulation of DNA damage. The particular focus is the hypothesis that these enhanced and persisting protective responses reduce the steady state level of non-radiation DNA damage, thereby reducing deleterious outcomes such as cancer and aging. The emerging model urgently needs rigorous experimental testing, since it suggests, importantly, that the LNT hypothesis is invalid for complex adaptive systems such as mammalian organisms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12856953     DOI: 10.1191/0960327103ht365oa

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Exp Toxicol        ISSN: 0960-3271            Impact factor:   2.903


  49 in total

1.  Early effects of low dose C ion or x-ray irradiation on peripheral blood lymphocytes of patients with alimentary tract cancer.

Authors:  Yingtai Chen; Xuezhong Chen; Yumin Li; Hong Zhang; Yi Xie; Xiaowei Zhang; Huizi Ren; Yanling Wang; Shiqi Liao; Mingyan He; Jinyu Ren; Jieyu Zhang; Xiadong Zhou; Tongzhang Zheng; Briseis A Kilfoy; Yawei Zhang
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-08-02       Impact factor: 2.658

2.  Acute Tumor Lactate Perturbations as a Biomarker of Genotoxic Stress: Development of a Biochemical Model.

Authors:  Vlad C Sandulache; Yunyun Chen; Heath D Skinner; Tongtong Lu; Lei Feng; Laurence E Court; Jeffrey N Myers; Raymond E Meyn; Clifton D Fuller; James A Bankson; Stephen Y Lai
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 6.261

3.  Cytogenetic effects of low-dose radiation with different LET in human peripheral blood lymphocytes.

Authors:  E A Nasonova; N L Shmakova; O V Komova; L A Mel'nikova; T A Fadeeva; E A Krasavin; S Ritter
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2006-10-10       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  Association between Local External Gamma Rays and Frequency of Cancer in Babol-Iran.

Authors:  Ali Shabestani Monfared; Karimollah Hajian; Reza Hosseini; Akbar Nasir
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 5.  Systems biology and its potential role in radiobiology.

Authors:  Ludwig Feinendegen; Philip Hahnfeldt; Eric E Schadt; Michael Stumpf; Eberhard O Voit
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2007-12-18       Impact factor: 1.925

6.  Sparsely ionizing diagnostic and natural background radiations are likely preventing cancer and other genomic-instability-associated diseases.

Authors:  Bobby R Scott; Jennifer Di Palma
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-12-21       Impact factor: 2.658

7.  A review: Development of a microdose model for analysis of adaptive response and bystander dose response behavior.

Authors:  Bobby E Leonard
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-02-27       Impact factor: 2.658

8.  The Australasian Radiation Protection Society's position statement on risks from low levels of ionizing radiation.

Authors:  Donald Higson
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2007-09-30       Impact factor: 2.658

9.  What becomes of nuclear risk assessment in light of radiation hormesis?

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-08-25       Impact factor: 2.658

10.  Responses to low doses of ionizing radiation in biological systems.

Authors:  Ludwig E Feinendegen; Myron Pollycove; Charles A Sondhaus
Journal:  Nonlinearity Biol Toxicol Med       Date:  2004-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.