Literature DB >> 1975605

The relationship of DNA double-strand break induction to radiosensitivity in human tumour cell lines.

T J McMillan1, A M Cassoni, S Edwards, A Holmes, J H Peacock.   

Abstract

Recent data suggest that the differences in radiosensitivity between cell lines can be related to differences in dsb induction (Radford 1986a). In the light of this we have set out to assess the extent to which differences in radiation survival between human tumour cell lines can be attributed to differences in dsb induction. For nine human tumour lines survival was assayed by clonogenic assay and compared with dsb induction by irradiation at ice-bath temperature as measured by neutral filter elution. The lines varied widely in their sensitivity, ranging from a sensitive neuroblastoma (surviving fraction at 2 Gy, SF2 = 0.13) to a resistant bladder carcinoma (SF2 = 0.62). Dsb induction was found to vary between the cell lines, such that resistant cells generally suffered less damage than sensitive ones. However, the relationship between damage induction and cellular sensitivity was not a simple one, and other factors which may influence sensitivity need to be invoked. These data suggest that, in human tumour cell lines, differences in radiosensitivity may at least in part be due to different levels of damage induction, but that some lines may vary in their tolerance of damage due to differences in biological characteristics such as repair capacity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 1975605     DOI: 10.1080/09553009014551781

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol        ISSN: 0955-3002            Impact factor:   2.694


  13 in total

1.  Lack of interference of DNA single-strand breaks with the measurement of double-strand breaks in mammalian cells using the neutral filter elution assay.

Authors:  P J Johnston; P E Bryant
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  1991-05-25       Impact factor: 16.971

2.  Cytoplasmic sequestration of wild-type p53 protein impairs the G1 checkpoint after DNA damage.

Authors:  U M Moll; A G Ostermeyer; R Haladay; B Winkfield; M Frazier; G Zambetti
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.272

3.  The ratio of initial/residual DNA damage predicts intrinsic radiosensitivity in seven cervix carcinoma cell lines.

Authors:  B Marples; D Longhurst; A M Eastham; C M West
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Host cell reactivation of gamma-irradiated adenovirus 5 in human cell lines of varying radiosensitivity.

Authors:  J J Eady; J H Peacock; T J McMillan
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Micronucleus formation in human tumour cells: lack of correlation with radiosensitivity.

Authors:  C Bush; T J McMillan
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  A DNA repair defect in a radiation-sensitive clone of a human bladder carcinoma cell line.

Authors:  S N Powell; S J Whitaker; S M Edwards; T J McMillan
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  DNA double-strand break rejoining rates, inherent radiation sensitivity and human tumour response to radiotherapy.

Authors:  J L Schwartz; R Mustafi; M A Beckett; R R Weichselbaum
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  A correlation between nuclear supercoiling and the response of patients with bladder cancer to radiotherapy.

Authors:  T H Lynch; P Anderson; D M Wallace; G M Kondratowicz; R P Beaney; A T Vaughan
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Cellular radiosensitivity: do separate predictive parameters apply for fibroblasts and for human tumour cells?

Authors:  L Bohm
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-01-26       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Radiosensitivity of human tumour cells is correlated with the induction but not with the repair of DNA double-strand breaks.

Authors:  R A El-Awady; E Dikomey; J Dahm-Daphi
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-08-04       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.