| Literature DB >> 23536543 |
Rositsa Hristova1, Valeria Hadjidekova, Mira Grigorova, Teodora Nikolova, Minka Bulanova, Ljubomira Popova, Albena Staynova, Donka Benova.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the genotoxic effects of ionizing radiation in vivo in exposed Bulgarian nuclear power plant workers by using classical cytogenetic and molecular cytogenetic analyses of peripheral lymphocytes. Chromosome analysis using fluorescence in situ hybrydization (FISH) and Giemsa techniques was undertaken on 63 workers and 45 administrative staff controls from the Bulgarian Nuclear Power Plant. Using the Giemsa method, the frequencies of cells studied with chromosome aberrations, dicentrics plus rings and chromosome fragments in the radiation workers were significantly higher compared with the control group (P = 0.044, P = 0.014, and P = 0.033, respectively). A significant association between frequencies of dicentrics plus rings and accumulated doses was registered (P < 0.01). In the present study, a FISH cocktail of whole chromosome paints for chromosomes 1, 4 and 11 was used. A significant association between frequency of translocations and accumulated doses was also observed (P < 0.001). Within the control group, a correlation was found between age and the spontaneous frequency of translocations. No correlation was found between smoking status and frequency of translocations. When compared with the control group, workers with accumulated doses up to 100 mSv showed no increase in genome translocation frequency, whereas workers with accumulated doses from 101 to 200 mSv showed a statistically significant doubling of genome translocation frequency (P = 0.009). Thus, in cases of chronic exposure and for purposes of retrospective dosimetry, the genome frequency of translocations is a more useful marker for evaluation of genotoxic effects than dicentric frequency.Entities:
Keywords: FISH; chromosome aberrations; dose accumulation; nuclear power plant workers; occupational exposure
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23536543 PMCID: PMC3766290 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrt018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Radiat Res ISSN: 0449-3060 Impact factor: 2.724
General characteristics of the study population with respect to age, smoking and alcohol intake
| NPP workers | Controls | |
|---|---|---|
| No. (%) | No. (%) | |
| 63 (100) | 45 (100) | |
| • men | 63 (100) | 38 (85) |
| • women | 0 (0) | 7 (15) |
| 63 (100) | 45 (100) | |
| • 18–29 | 0 (0) | 5 (11) |
| • 30–39 | 23 (36) | 20 (45) |
| • 40–49 | 32 (51) | 14 (31) |
| • >50 | 8 (13) | 6 (13) |
| 63 (100) | 45 (100) | |
| • yes | 44 (70) | 29 (64) |
| • no | 19 (30) | 16 (36) |
| 63 (100) | 45 (100) | |
| • yes | 52 (83) | 32 (71) |
| • no | 11 (17) | 13 (29) |
Frequencies of chromosomal aberrations in control and NPP workers
| Workers | Controls | P-value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | mean per 100 cells | S.E.M | No. | mean per 100 cells | S.E.M | ||
| Number of subjects | 63 | 45 | |||||
| Number of cells | 30 521 | 21 853 | |||||
| Cells with aberrations | 599 | 1.96 | 0.14 | 314 | 1.44 | 0.11 | 0.044* |
| Dicentrics plus rings | 27 | 0.09 | 0.02 | 7 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.014* |
| Chromosome fragments | 399 | 1.31 | 0.08 | 202 | 0.92 | 0.08 | 0.033* |
| Chromatid fragments | 197 | 0.65 | 0.09 | 97 | 0.44 | 0.06 | 0.07 |
| Chromatid exchange | 30 | 0.11 | 0.03 | 13 | 0.1 | 0.02 | 0.2 |
| Rogue cells | 4 | 0.004 4 | 0.004 4 | 1 | 0.012 7 | 0.006 | 0.2 |
*P < 0.05, when compared with controls. S.E.M. = standard error of the mean.
Fig. 1.Individual frequencies of dicentrics plotted against cumulative doses. The straight line represents the linear regression of the data.
Cytogenetic results (classical method), pooled data for dose groups
| Dose (mSv) | No. of individuals | No. of cells | Cells with aberrations | Dicentrics + rings % ± S.E.M. | Chromosome fragments % ± S.E.M. | Chromatid fragments % ± S.E.M. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Controls | 45 | 21 853 | 0.95 ± 0.1 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.95 ± 0.1 | 0.45 ± 0.06 |
| <100 | 6 | 3 000 | 0.87 ± 0.2 | 0.02 ± 0.02 | 0.43 ± 0.2 | 0.43 ± 0.1 |
| 101-200 | 18 | 8 561 | 1.71 ± 0.18 | 0.09 ± 0.04 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 0.58 ± 0.1 |
| 201-300 | 13 | 6 095 | 1.61 ± 0.2 | 0.07 ± 0.03 | 0.9 ± 0.16 | 0.55 ± 0.10 |
| 301-400 | 14 | 6 865 | 2.09 ± 0.128* | 0.09 ± 0.03* | 1.63 ± 0.4* | 0.64 ± 0.1 |
| >401 | 12 | 6 000 | 2.92 ± 0.5* | 0.13 ± 0.04** | 1.75 ± 0.3* | 0.9 ± 0.29 |
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, when compared with controls. S.E.M. = standard error of the mean
Genome frequency of translocations (FISH method), pooled data for dose groups
| Dose (mSv) | No. of individuals | No. of cells | No. of translocations | No. of genome equivalents analyzed | Genome frequency of translocations ± S.E.M.( × 10−3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Controls | 45 | 60 325 | 121 | 17 939 | 6.75 ± 0.83 |
| Workers | 63 | 79 144 | 325 | 23 370 | 13.91 ± 1.2* |
| <100 | 6 | 4 948 | 11 | 1 573 | 6.99 ± 1.55 |
| 101–200 | 18 | 20 081 | 62 | 6 386 | 9.71 ± 1.8* |
| 201–300 | 13 | 15 048 | 72 | 4 639 | 15.52 ± 3.26** |
| 301–400 | 14 | 19 847 | 72 | 5 598 | 12.86 ± 2.01** |
| > 401 | 12 | 19 220 | 108 | 5 174 | 20.87 ± 2.95* |
*P < 0.01, **P < 0.001, when compared with controls. S.E.M. = standard error of the mean.
Fig. 2.Individual frequencies of translocations against cumulative doses. The straight line represents the linear regression of the data.