Literature DB >> 23830929

DNA-repair measurements by use of the modified comet assay: an inter-laboratory comparison within the European Comet Assay Validation Group (ECVAG).

Roger W L Godschalk1, Clara Ersson, Patrizia Riso, Marisa Porrini, Sabine A S Langie, Frederik-Jan van Schooten, Amaya Azqueta, Andrew R Collins, George D D Jones, Rachel W L Kwok, David H Phillips, Osman Sozeri, Alessandra Allione, Giuseppe Matullo, Lennart Möller, Lykke Forchhammer, Steffen Loft, Peter Møller.   

Abstract

The measurement of DNA-repair activity by extracts from cells or tissues by means of the single-cell gel electrophoresis (comet) assay has a high potential to become widely used in biomonitoring studies. We assessed the inter-laboratory variation in reported values of DNA-repair activity on substrate cells that had been incubated with Ro19-8022 plus light to generate oxidatively damaged DNA. Eight laboratories assessed the DNA-repair activity of three cell lines (i.e. one epithelial and two fibroblast cell lines), starting with cell pellets or with cell extracts provided by the coordinating laboratory. There was a large inter-laboratory variation, as evidenced by the range in the mean level of repair incisions between the laboratory with the lowest (0.002incisions/10(6)bp) and highest (0.988incisions/10(6)bp) incision activity. Nevertheless, six out of eight laboratories reported the same cell line as having the highest level of DNA-repair activity. The two laboratories that reported discordant results (with another cell line having the highest level of DNA-repair activity) were those that reported to have little experience with the modified comet assay to assess DNA repair. The laboratories were also less consistent in ordering the repair activity of the other two cell lines, probably because the DNA-repair activity by extracts from these cell lines were very similar (on average approximately 60-65% of the cell line with the highest repair capacity). A significant correlation was observed between the repair activity found in the provided and the self-made cell extracts (r=0.71, P<0.001), which indicates that the predominant source for inter-laboratory variation is derived from the incubation of the extract with substrate cells embedded in the gel. Overall, we conclude that the incubation step of cell extracts with the substrate cells can be identified as a major source of inter-laboratory variation in the modified comet assay for base-excision repair.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  8-Oxo-7,8-dihydroguanine; Base-excision repair; Biomonitoring; Oxidatively damaged DNA; Validation

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23830929     DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2013.06.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutat Res        ISSN: 0027-5107            Impact factor:   2.433


  6 in total

1.  Genotoxicity of Particles From Grinded Plastic Items in Caco-2 and HepG2 Cells.

Authors:  Martin Roursgaard; Monika Hezareh Rothmann; Juliane Schulte; Ioanna Karadimou; Elena Marinelli; Peter Møller
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-07-06

2.  Biomarkers of nucleic acid oxidation - A summary state-of-the-art.

Authors:  Mu-Rong Chao; Mark D Evans; Chiung-Wen Hu; Yunhee Ji; Peter Møller; Pavel Rossner; Marcus S Cooke
Journal:  Redox Biol       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 11.799

3.  Genotoxic and Cytotoxic Effects of Antiretroviral Combinations in Mice Bone Marrow.

Authors:  Aroldo Vieira de Moraes Filho; Cláudia de Jesus Silva Carvalho; Cristiene Costa Carneiro; Camila Regina do Vale; Débora Cristina da Silva Lima; Wanessa Fernandes Carvalho; Thiago Bernardi Vieira; Daniela de Melo E Silva; Kênya Silva Cunha; Lee Chen-Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Next generation high throughput DNA damage detection platform for genotoxic compound screening.

Authors:  Peter Sykora; Kristine L Witt; Pooja Revanna; Stephanie L Smith-Roe; Jonathan Dismukes; Donald G Lloyd; Bevin P Engelward; Robert W Sobol
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Drosophila comet assay: insights, uses, and future perspectives.

Authors:  Isabel Gaivão; L María Sierra
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 6.  DNA Damage in Chronic Kidney Disease: Evaluation of Clinical Biomarkers.

Authors:  Nicole Schupp; Helga Stopper; August Heidland
Journal:  Oxid Med Cell Longev       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 6.543

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.