Literature DB >> 23578187

The LET dependence of unrepaired chromosome damage in human cells: a break too far?

Bradford D Loucas1, Michael N Cornforth.   

Abstract

Cytogenetic damage is among the few radiobiological end points that allow a precise distinction to be made between misrepaired damage, represented by exchange-type aberrations such as dicentrics and translocations, and unrepaired damage that leads to "open breaks". This latter category includes both terminal deletions and incomplete exchanges, whose different mechanisms of formation can be recognized by multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization (mFISH). mFISH was used to examine the yields of chromosome aberrations at the first postirradiation mitosis in human fibroblasts and lymphocytes irradiated with ¹³⁷Cs γ rays, a radiation of low-linear energy transfer (LET), and two sources of high-LET radiation: α particles from ²³⁸Pu and 1 GeV/amu ⁵⁶Fe ions. In agreement with previous studies, our results show that irrespective of radiation quality, the overall level of misrepaired damage exceeds that of unrepaired damage by a large margin. The unrepaired component of damage produced by γ rays and α particles was remarkably similar, about 5%. On that basis it is difficult to justify the popular notion that the strong LET-dependence for aberration formation is due to unrepaired DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) that, by virtue of their complexity at the nanometer scale, are qualitatively different in nature. In marked contrast, this unrejoined component rose to about 14% after exposure to Fe ions. A closer look at the unrepaired component revealed that most of this roughly threefold difference was derived from incomplete exchanges. Despite vast differences in LET, unrejoined breaks from incomplete exchanges were far more likely to occur among exchanges that involved more than two breakpoints. We attempted to reconcile these observations in the form of a hypothesis that predicts that exchanges, irrespective of LET, should exhibit an increasing tendency for incompleteness as the number of initial breaks destined to take part in the exchange increases. This effect, we argue is not caused by the number of initial breaks per se, but instead reflects the maximum distance over which proximate breaks can interact. This adds a spatial aspect to multi-break interactions that we call "A Break Too Far".

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23578187      PMCID: PMC6058738          DOI: 10.1667/RR3159.2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Res        ISSN: 0033-7587            Impact factor:   2.841


  69 in total

1.  Random breakage and reunion chromosome aberration formation model; an interaction-distance version based on chromatin geometry.

Authors:  R K Sachs; D Levy; A M Chen; P J Simpson; M N Cornforth; E A Ingerman; P Hahnfeldt; L R Hlatky
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.694

2.  Complex chromosome aberrations in peripheral blood lymphocytes as a potential biomarker of exposure to high-LET alpha-particles.

Authors:  R M Anderson; S J Marsden; E G Wright; M A Kadhim; D T Goodhead; C S Griffin
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 2.694

Review 3.  On the nature of visible chromosomal gaps and breaks.

Authors:  J R K Savage
Journal:  Cytogenet Genome Res       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 1.636

4.  Influence of nuclear geometry on the formation of genetic rearrangements in human cells.

Authors:  M Durante; D Pignalosa; J A Jansen; X F Walboomers; S Ritter
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  SCHIP: statistics for chromosome interphase positioning based on interchange data.

Authors:  Sergi Vives; Bradford Loucas; Mariel Vazquez; David J Brenner; Rainer K Sachs; Lynn Hlatky; Michael Cornforth; Javier Arsuaga
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-05-10       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Chromosomes lacking telomeres are present in the progeny of human lymphocytes exposed to heavy ions.

Authors:  M Durante; K George; F A Cucinotta
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  Breakage of human interphase chromosomes by alpha particles and X-rays.

Authors:  J S Bedford; D T Goodhead
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 2.694

8.  Complex chromosome exchanges induced by gamma rays in human lymphocytes: an mFISH study.

Authors:  B D Loucas; M N Cornforth
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.841

9.  Accurate detection of true incomplete exchanges in human lymphocytes exposed to neutron radiation using chromosome painting in combination with a telomeric PNA probe.

Authors:  J Fomina; F Darroudi; A T Natarajan
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.694

10.  Joining of correct and incorrect DNA double-strand break ends in normal human and ataxia telangiectasia fibroblasts.

Authors:  M Löbrich; M Kühne; J Wetzel; K Rothkamm
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.006

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Crosstalk between telomere maintenance and radiation effects: A key player in the process of radiation-induced carcinogenesis.

Authors:  Grace Shim; Michelle Ricoul; William M Hempel; Edouard I Azzam; Laure Sabatier
Journal:  Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res       Date:  2014-01-31       Impact factor: 5.657

Review 2.  Implementation of the Chick Chorioallantoic Membrane (CAM) Model in Radiation Biology and Experimental Radiation Oncology Research.

Authors:  Nicole Dünker; Verena Jendrossek
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-07       Impact factor: 6.639

3.  Disruption of Chromatin Dynamics by Hypotonic Stress Suppresses HR and Shifts DSB Processing to Error-Prone SSA.

Authors:  Lisa Marie Krieger; Emil Mladenov; Aashish Soni; Marilen Demond; Martin Stuschke; George Iliakis
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  Biological Effects of Monoenergetic Carbon Ions and Their Associated Secondary Particles.

Authors:  Dylan J Buglewicz; Kade D Walsh; Hirokazu Hirakawa; Hisashi Kitamura; Akira Fujimori; Takamitsu A Kato
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 6.244

5.  Requirement for Parp-1 and DNA ligases 1 or 3 but not of Xrcc1 in chromosomal translocation formation by backup end joining.

Authors:  Aashish Soni; Maria Siemann; Martha Grabos; Tamara Murmann; Gabriel E Pantelias; George Iliakis
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2014-04-19       Impact factor: 16.971

Review 6.  Limitations in predicting the space radiation health risk for exploration astronauts.

Authors:  Jeffery C Chancellor; Rebecca S Blue; Keith A Cengel; Serena M Auñón-Chancellor; Kathleen H Rubins; Helmut G Katzgraber; Ann R Kennedy
Journal:  NPJ Microgravity       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 4.415

7.  Stochastic multicellular modeling of x-ray irradiation, DNA damage induction, DNA free-end misrejoining and cell death.

Authors:  Jake C Forster; Michael J J Douglass; Wendy M Phillips; Eva Bezak
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.