Literature DB >> 23886340

Laboratory intercomparison of gene expression assays.

C Badie1, S Kabacik, Y Balagurunathan, N Bernard, M Brengues, G Faggioni, R Greither, F Lista, A Peinnequin, T Poyot, F Herodin, A Missel, B Terbrueggen, F Zenhausern, K Rothkamm, V Meineke, H Braselmann, C Beinke, M Abend.   

Abstract

The possibility of a large-scale acute radiation exposure necessitates the development of new methods that could provide rapid individual dose estimates with high sample throughput. The focus of the study was an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using gene expression assays. Lithium-heparinized whole blood from one healthy donor was irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) immediately after venipuncture at approximately 37°C using single X-ray doses. Blood samples to establish calibration curves (0.25-4 Gy) as well as 10 blinded test samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were incubated for 24 h at 37°C supplemented with an equal volume of medium and 10% fetal calf serum. For quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), samples were lysed, stored at -20°C and shipped on ice. For the Chemical Ligation Dependent Probe Amplification methodology (CLPA), aliquots were incubated in 2 ml CLPA reaction buffer (DxTerity), mixed and shipped at room temperature. Assays were run in each laboratory according to locally established protocols. The mean absolute difference (MAD) of estimated doses relative to the true doses (in Gy) was calculated. We also merged doses into binary categories reflecting aspects of clinical/diagnostic relevance and examined accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest reported time on dose estimates was <8 h. The standard deviation of technical replicate measurements in 75% of all measurements was below 11%. MAD values of 0.3-0.5 Gy and 0.8-1.3 Gy divided the laboratories contributions into two groups. These fourfold differences in accuracy could be primarily explained by unexpected variances of the housekeeping gene (P = 0.0008) and performance differences in processing of calibration and blinded test samples by half of the contributing laboratories. Reported gene expression dose estimates aggregated into binary categories in general showed an accuracies and sensitivities of 93-100% and 76-100% for the groups, with low MAD and high MAD, respectively. In conclusion, gene expression-based dose estimates were reported quickly, and for laboratories with MAD between 0.3-0.5 Gy binary dose categories of clinical significance could be discriminated with an accuracy and sensitivity comparable to established cytogenetic assays.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23886340      PMCID: PMC4117252          DOI: 10.1667/RR3236.1

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


  20 in total

1.  Automated micronucleus (MN) scoring for population triage in case of large scale radiation events.

Authors:  Petra Willems; Liezel August; Jacobus Slabbert; Horst Romm; Ursula Oestreicher; Hubert Thierens; Anne Vral
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.694

2.  Strategy for population triage based on dicentric analysis.

Authors:  Aurélie Vaurijoux; Gaëtan Gruel; Frédéric Pouzoulet; Eric Grégoire; Cécile Martin; Sandrine Roch-Lefèvre; Pascale Voisin; Philippe Voisin; Laurence Roy
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.841

3.  Biological dosimetry for triage of casualties in a large-scale radiological emergency:capacity of the EU member states.

Authors:  Andrzej Wojcik; David Lloyd; Horst Romm; Laurence Roy
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 0.972

4.  Biological dosimetry by the triage dicentric chromosome assay: potential implications for treatment of acute radiation syndrome in radiological mass casualties.

Authors:  Horst Romm; Ruth C Wilkins; C Norman Coleman; Patricia K Lillis-Hearne; Terry C Pellmar; Gordon K Livingston; Akio A Awa; Mark S Jenkins; Mitsuaki A Yoshida; Ursula Oestreicher; Pataje G S Prasanna
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  Gene expression analysis in radiotherapy patients and C57BL/6 mice as a measure of exposure to ionizing radiation.

Authors:  Ashley N Filiano; Hassan M Fathallah-Shaykh; John Fiveash; Jarrod Gage; Alan Cantor; Sandhya Kharbanda; Martin R Johnson
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  The RABiT: a rapid automated biodosimetry tool for radiological triage. II. Technological developments.

Authors:  Guy Garty; Youhua Chen; Helen C Turner; Jian Zhang; Oleksandra V Lyulko; Antonella Bertucci; Yanping Xu; Hongliang Wang; Nabil Simaan; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; Y Lawrence Yao; David J Brenner
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2011-05-11       Impact factor: 2.694

7.  Gene expression following ionising radiation: identification of biomarkers for dose estimation and prediction of individual response.

Authors:  Sylwia Kabacik; Alan Mackay; Narinder Tamber; Grainne Manning; Paul Finnon; Francois Paillier; Alan Ashworth; Simon Bouffler; Christophe Badie
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 2.694

8.  Diagnosis of partial body radiation exposure in mice using peripheral blood gene expression profiles.

Authors:  Sarah K Meadows; Holly K Dressman; Pamela Daher; Heather Himburg; J Lauren Russell; Phuong Doan; Nelson J Chao; Joseph Lucas; Joseph R Nevins; John P Chute
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-07-12       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Multiple blood-proteins approach for early-response exposure assessment using an in vivo murine radiation model.

Authors:  Natalia I Ossetrova; William F Blakely
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.694

10.  Biodosimetry on small blood volume using gene expression assay.

Authors:  Muriel Brengues; Brigitte Paap; Michael Bittner; Sally Amundson; Bruce Seligmann; Ronald Korn; Ralf Lenigk; Frederic Zenhausern
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.316

View more
  28 in total

1.  Impact of Neutron Exposure on Global Gene Expression in a Human Peripheral Blood Model.

Authors:  Constantinos G Broustas; Yanping Xu; Andrew D Harken; Mashkura Chowdhury; Guy Garty; Sally A Amundson
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 2.841

2.  Microfluidic module for blood cell separation for gene expression radiobiological assays.

Authors:  Muriel Brengues; Jian Gu; Frederic Zenhausern
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 0.972

3.  Dicentric Dose Estimates for Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy in the RTGene Study to Assess Blood Dosimetric Models and the New Bayesian Method for Gradient Exposure.

Authors:  Jayne Moquet; Manuel Higueras; Ellen Donovan; Sue Boyle; Stephen Barnard; Clare Bricknell; Mingzhu Sun; Lone Gothard; Grainne O'Brien; Lourdes Cruz-Garcia; Christophe Badie; Elizabeth Ainsbury; Navita Somaiah
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 2.841

4.  Chromosome Translocations, Inversions and Telomere Length for Retrospective Biodosimetry on Exposed U.S. Atomic Veterans.

Authors:  Miles J McKenna; Erin Robinson; Lynn Taylor; Christopher Tompkins; Michael N Cornforth; Steven L Simon; Susan M Bailey
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  Advances in a framework to compare bio-dosimetry methods for triage in large-scale radiation events.

Authors:  Ann Barry Flood; Holly K Boyle; Gaixin Du; Eugene Demidenko; Roberto J Nicolalde; Benjamin B Williams; Harold M Swartz
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 0.972

6.  ROC Analysis for Evaluation of Radiation Biodosimetry Technologies.

Authors:  Benjamin B Williams; Ann Barry Flood; Eugene Demidenko; Harold M Swartz
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 0.972

7.  Measurement of γ-H2AX foci, miRNA-101, and gene expression as a means to quantify radiation-absorbed dose in cancer patients who had undergone radiotherapy.

Authors:  Venkateswarlu Raavi; J Surendran; K Karthik; Solomon F D Paul; K Thayalan; J Arunakaran; Perumal Venkatachalam
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 1.925

8.  Influence of Confounding Factors on Radiation Dose Estimation Using In Vivo Validated Transcriptional Biomarkers.

Authors:  Lourdes Cruz-Garcia; Grainne O'Brien; Ellen Donovan; Lone Gothard; Sue Boyle; Antoine Laval; Isabelle Testard; Lucyna Ponge; Grzegorz Woźniak; Leszek Miszczyk; Serge M Candéias; Elizabeth Ainsbury; Piotr Widlak; Navita Somaiah; Christophe Badie
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.316

9.  Radiation Dose-Rate Effects on Gene Expression in a Mouse Biodosimetry Model.

Authors:  Sunirmal Paul; Lubomir B Smilenov; Carl D Elliston; Sally A Amundson
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 2.841

10.  Human serum miR-34a as an indicator of exposure to ionizing radiation.

Authors:  Mohammad Halimi; Ahmad Shahabi; Dariush Moslemi; Hadi Parsian; S Mohsen Asghari; Reyhaneh Sariri; Farshid Yeganeh; Ebrahim Zabihi
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 1.925

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.