PURPOSE: The chromosomal radiosensitivity of a selected group of familial breast cancer patients carrying a mutation in BRCA1 (n=11) or BRCA2 (n=9) and a group of healthy mutation carriers (n=12) was investigated and compared to a reference group of breast cancer patients without a BRCA1/2 mutation (n=78) and a group of healthy women carrying no mutation (n=58). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The chromosomal radiosensitivity was assessed with the G2 and the G0-micronucleus (MN)-assay on fresh blood samples and on Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-transformed lymphoblastoid cell lines. For the MN-assay, lymphocytes were exposed in vitro to 3.5 Gy and 2 Gy 60Co gamma-rays at a high dose rate (HDR) or low dose rate (LDR). 70-h post-irradiation cultures were arrested and micronuclei were scored in 1000 binucleate cells. For the G2-assay lymphocytes were irradiated in vitro with a dose of 0.4 Gy 60Co gamma-rays after 71h incubation. Cultures were arrested 90 min after irradiation and chromatid breaks were scored in 50 metaphases. RESULTS: The group of breast cancer patients with a BRCA1 or 2 mutation was on average more radiosensitive than the control group, but not different from breast cancer patients without a BRCA mutation. The radiation response of healthy BRCA1/2 carriers was not significantly different from the control group and also not different from relatives without a BRCA mutation. Comparing the radiation response in EBV cell lines derived from breast cancer patients with or without a BRCA1 mutation revealed no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal that chromosomal radiosensitivity observed in breast cancer patients heterozygous for BRCA1 or 2 mutations, could not be demonstrated in healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. This suggests that mutations in BRCA1 or 2 genes are not playing a main role in chromosomal radiosensitivity, this although BRCA1 and 2 are both involved in DNA repair/signalling processes.
PURPOSE: The chromosomal radiosensitivity of a selected group of familial breast cancerpatients carrying a mutation in BRCA1 (n=11) or BRCA2 (n=9) and a group of healthy mutation carriers (n=12) was investigated and compared to a reference group of breast cancerpatients without a BRCA1/2 mutation (n=78) and a group of healthy women carrying no mutation (n=58). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The chromosomal radiosensitivity was assessed with the G2 and the G0-micronucleus (MN)-assay on fresh blood samples and on Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-transformed lymphoblastoid cell lines. For the MN-assay, lymphocytes were exposed in vitro to 3.5 Gy and 2 Gy 60Co gamma-rays at a high dose rate (HDR) or low dose rate (LDR). 70-h post-irradiation cultures were arrested and micronuclei were scored in 1000 binucleate cells. For the G2-assay lymphocytes were irradiated in vitro with a dose of 0.4 Gy 60Co gamma-rays after 71h incubation. Cultures were arrested 90 min after irradiation and chromatid breaks were scored in 50 metaphases. RESULTS: The group of breast cancerpatients with a BRCA1 or 2 mutation was on average more radiosensitive than the control group, but not different from breast cancerpatients without a BRCA mutation. The radiation response of healthy BRCA1/2 carriers was not significantly different from the control group and also not different from relatives without a BRCA mutation. Comparing the radiation response in EBV cell lines derived from breast cancerpatients with or without a BRCA1 mutation revealed no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal that chromosomal radiosensitivity observed in breast cancerpatients heterozygous for BRCA1 or 2 mutations, could not be demonstrated in healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. This suggests that mutations in BRCA1 or 2 genes are not playing a main role in chromosomal radiosensitivity, this although BRCA1 and 2 are both involved in DNA repair/signalling processes.
Authors: Hiroyuki Konishi; Morassa Mohseni; Akina Tamaki; Joseph P Garay; Sarah Croessmann; Sivasundaram Karnan; Akinobu Ota; Hong Yuen Wong; Yuko Konishi; Bedri Karakas; Khola Tahir; Abde M Abukhdeir; John P Gustin; Justin Cidado; Grace M Wang; David Cosgrove; Rory Cochran; Danijela Jelovac; Michaela J Higgins; Sabrina Arena; Lauren Hawkins; Josh Lauring; Amy L Gross; Christopher M Heaphy; Yositaka Hosokawa; Edward Gabrielson; Alan K Meeker; Kala Visvanathan; Pedram Argani; Kurtis E Bachman; Ben Ho Park Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-10-10 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: David G Cox; Jacques Simard; Daniel Sinnett; Yosr Hamdi; Penny Soucy; Manon Ouimet; Laure Barjhoux; Carole Verny-Pierre; Lesley McGuffog; Sue Healey; Csilla Szabo; Mark H Greene; Phuong L Mai; Irene L Andrulis; Mads Thomassen; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Maria A Caligo; Eitan Friedman; Yael Laitman; Bella Kaufman; Shani S Paluch; Åke Borg; Per Karlsson; Marie Stenmark Askmalm; Gisela Barbany Bustinza; Katherine L Nathanson; Susan M Domchek; Timothy R Rebbeck; Javier Benítez; Ute Hamann; Matti A Rookus; Ans M W van den Ouweland; Margreet G E M Ausems; Cora M Aalfs; Christi J van Asperen; Peter Devilee; Hans J J P Gille; Susan Peock; Debra Frost; D Gareth Evans; Ros Eeles; Louise Izatt; Julian Adlard; Joan Paterson; Jacqueline Eason; Andrew K Godwin; Marie-Alice Remon; Virginie Moncoutier; Marion Gauthier-Villars; Christine Lasset; Sophie Giraud; Agnès Hardouin; Pascaline Berthet; Hagay Sobol; François Eisinger; Brigitte Bressac de Paillerets; Olivier Caron; Capucine Delnatte; David Goldgar; Alex Miron; Hilmi Ozcelik; Saundra Buys; Melissa C Southey; Mary Beth Terry; Christian F Singer; Anne-Catharina Dressler; Muy-Kheng Tea; Thomas V O Hansen; Oskar Johannsson; Marion Piedmonte; Gustavo C Rodriguez; Jack B Basil; Stephanie Blank; Amanda E Toland; Marco Montagna; Claudine Isaacs; Ignacio Blanco; Simon A Gayther; Kirsten B Moysich; Rita K Schmutzler; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Christoph Engel; Alfons Meindl; Nina Ditsch; Norbert Arnold; Dieter Niederacher; Christian Sutter; Dorothea Gadzicki; Britta Fiebig; Trinidad Caldes; Rachel Laframboise; Heli Nevanlinna; Xiaoqing Chen; Jonathan Beesley; Amanda B Spurdle; Susan L Neuhausen; Yuan C Ding; Fergus J Couch; Xianshu Wang; Paolo Peterlongo; Siranoush Manoukian; Loris Bernard; Paolo Radice; Douglas F Easton; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Antonis C Antoniou; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Sylvie Mazoyer; Olga M Sinilnikova Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2011-09-02 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Bhavana V Chapman; Diane Liu; Yu Shen; Oluwafikayo O Olamigoke; David S Lakomy; Angelica M Gutierrez Barrera; Shane R Stecklein; Gabriel O Sawakuchi; Scott J Bright; Isabelle Bedrosian; Jennifer K Litton; Benjamin D Smith; Wendy A Woodward; George H Perkins; Karen E Hoffman; Michael C Stauder; Eric A Strom; Banu K Arun; Simona F Shaitelman Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-10-03 Impact factor: 8.013
Authors: Lucia Guidugli; Aura Carreira; Sandrine M Caputo; Asa Ehlen; Alvaro Galli; Alvaro N A Monteiro; Susan L Neuhausen; Thomas V O Hansen; Fergus J Couch; Maaike P G Vreeswijk Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2013-12-03 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Jonine L Bernstein; Duncan C Thomas; Roy E Shore; Mark Robson; John D Boice; Marilyn Stovall; Michael Andersson; Leslie Bernstein; Kathleen E Malone; Anne S Reiner; Charles F Lynch; Marinela Capanu; Susan A Smith; Lina Tellhed; Sharon N Teraoka; Colin B Begg; Jorgen H Olsen; Lene Mellemkjaer; Xiaolin Liang; Anh T Diep; Ake Borg; Patrick Concannon; Robert W Haile Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jean J Latimer; Wendy S Rubinstein; Jennifer M Johnson; Amal Kanbour-Shakir; Victor G Vogel; Stephen G Grant Journal: BMC Med Genet Date: 2005-06-14 Impact factor: 2.103