Literature DB >> 18648606

A role for bioelectric effects in the induction of bystander signals by ionizing radiation?

C Mothersill1, G Moran, F McNeill, M D Gow, J Denbeigh, W Prestwich, C B Seymour.   

Abstract

The induction of "bystander effects" i.e. effects in cells which have not received an ionizing radiation track, is now accepted but the mechanisms are not completely clear. Bystander effects following high and low LET radiation exposure are accepted but mechanisms are still not understood. There is some evidence for a physical component to the signal. This paper tests the hypothesis that bioelectric or biomagnetic phenomena are involved. Human immortalized skin keratinocytes and primary explants of mouse bladder and fish skin, were exposed directly to ionizing radiation or treated in a variety of bystander protocols. Exposure of cells was conducted by shielding one group of flasks using lead, to reduce the dose below the threshold of 2mGy (60)Cobalt gamma rays established for the bystander effect. The endpoint for the bystander effect in the reporter system used was reduction in cloning efficiency (RCE). The magnitude of the RCE was similar in shielded and unshielded flasks. When cells were placed in a Faraday cage the magnitude of the RCE was less but not eliminated. The results suggest that liquid media or cell-cell contact transmission of bystander factors may be only part of the bystander mechanism. Bioelectric or bio magnetic fields may have a role to play. To test this further, cells were placed in a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) machine for 10 min using a typical head scan protocol. This treatment also induced a bystander response. Apart from the obvious clinical relevance, the MRI results further suggest that bystander effects may be produced by non-ionizing exposures. It is concluded that bioelectric or magnetic effects may be involved in producing bystander signaling cascades commonly seen following ionizing radiation exposure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Radiation-induced bystander effect; bioelectric effects; explant cultures; fish cells; murine bladder

Year:  2007        PMID: 18648606      PMCID: PMC2477697          DOI: 10.2203/dose-response.06-011.Mothersill

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dose Response        ISSN: 1559-3258            Impact factor:   2.658


  42 in total

1.  Initiation of apoptosis in cells exposed to medium from the progeny of irradiated cells: a possible mechanism for bystander-induced genomic instability?

Authors:  F M Lyng; C B Seymour; C Mothersill
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 2.  Metabolic oxidation/reduction reactions and cellular responses to ionizing radiation: a unifying concept in stress response biology.

Authors:  Douglas R Spitz; Edouard I Azzam; Jian Jian Li; David Gius
Journal:  Cancer Metastasis Rev       Date:  2004 Aug-Dec       Impact factor: 9.264

Review 3.  Radiation-induced bystander effects--implications for cancer.

Authors:  Carmel Mothersill; Colin B Seymour
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 60.716

4.  Contribution of radiation-induced, nitric oxide-mediated bystander effect to radiation-induced adaptive response.

Authors:  Hideki Matsumoto; Takeo Ohnishi
Journal:  Biol Sci Space       Date:  2004-11

5.  Effects of pulsed magnetic stimulation on tumor development and immune functions in mice.

Authors:  Sachiko Yamaguchi; Mari Ogiue-Ikeda; Masaki Sekino; Shoogo Ueno
Journal:  Bioelectromagnetics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.010

6.  Pulsed electromagnetic fields simultaneously induce osteogenesis and upregulate transcription of bone morphogenetic proteins 2 and 4 in rat osteoblasts in vitro.

Authors:  T Bodamyali; B Bhatt; F J Hughes; V R Winrow; J M Kanczler; B Simon; J Abbott; D R Blake; C R Stevens
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  1998-09-18       Impact factor: 3.575

7.  Radiation-induced genomic instability and persisting oxidative stress in primary bone marrow cultures.

Authors:  S M Clutton; K M Townsend; C Walker; J D Ansell; E G Wright
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 4.944

8.  Bystander effects of ionizing radiation can be modulated by signaling amines.

Authors:  R C C Poon; N Agnihotri; C Seymour; C Mothersill
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2007-02-08       Impact factor: 6.498

9.  Continuous cell lines with altered growth and differentiation properties originate after transfection of human keratinocytes with human papillomavirus type 16 DNA.

Authors:  L Pirisi; K E Creek; J Doniger; J A DiPaolo
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 4.944

10.  Action of x-rays on mammalian cells.

Authors:  T T PUCK; P I MARCUS
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  1956-05-01       Impact factor: 14.307

View more
  5 in total

1.  Alternative medicine techniques have non-linear effects on radiation response and can alter the expression of radiation induced bystander effects.

Authors:  Carmel Mothersill; Richard Smith; Matthew Henry; Colin Seymour; Raimond Wong
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 2.658

2.  Radiation-induced bystander effects in the Atlantic salmon (salmo salar L.) following mixed exposure to copper and aluminum combined with low-dose gamma radiation.

Authors:  Carmel Mothersill; Richard W Smith; Lene Sørlie Heier; Hans-Christian Teien; Ole Christian Lind; Ole Christian Land; Colin B Seymour; Deborah Oughton; Brit Salbu
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 1.925

Review 3.  Relevance of Non-Targeted Effects for Radiotherapy and Diagnostic Radiology; A Historical and Conceptual Analysis of Key Players.

Authors:  Carmel Mothersill; Andrej Rusin; Colin Seymour
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Biological Entanglement-Like Effect After Communication of Fish Prior to X-Ray Exposure.

Authors:  Carmel Mothersill; Richard Smith; Jiaxi Wang; Andrej Rusin; Cris Fernandez-Palomo; Jennifer Fazzari; Colin Seymour
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  Quantifying Biophoton Emissions From Human Cells Directly Exposed to Low-Dose Gamma Radiation.

Authors:  Jason Cohen; Nguyen T K Vo; David R Chettle; Fiona E McNeill; Colin B Seymour; Carmel E Mothersill
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 2.658

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.