BACKGROUND: Limited evidence suggests that very high-intensity exercise is positively associated with DNA damage but moderate exercise may be associated with DNA repair. METHODS: Participants were 220 healthy, Washington State 50- to 76-year-olds in the validity/biomarker substudy of the VITamins And Lifestyle (VITAL) cohort, who provided blood samples and completed questionnaires assessing recent physical activity and demographic and health factors. Measures included nested activity subsets: total activity, moderate- plus high-intensity activity, and high-intensity activity. DNA damage (n = 122) and repair (n = 99) were measured using the comet assay. Multivariate linear regression was used to estimate regression coefficients and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for relationships between MET-hours per week of activity and each DNA outcome (damage, and 15- and 60-minute repair capacities). RESULTS: DNA damage was not associated with any measure of activity. However, 60-minute DNA repair was positively associated with both total activity (β = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.0057-0.412; P = .044) and high-intensity activity (β = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.20-0.60; P = .036), adjusting for age, sex, BMI, and current multivitamin use. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to assess broad ranges of activity intensity levels related to DNA damage and repair. Physical activity was unrelated to DNA damage but was associated with increased repair.
BACKGROUND: Limited evidence suggests that very high-intensity exercise is positively associated with DNA damage but moderate exercise may be associated with DNA repair. METHODS:Participants were 220 healthy, Washington State 50- to 76-year-olds in the validity/biomarker substudy of the VITamins And Lifestyle (VITAL) cohort, who provided blood samples and completed questionnaires assessing recent physical activity and demographic and health factors. Measures included nested activity subsets: total activity, moderate- plus high-intensity activity, and high-intensity activity. DNA damage (n = 122) and repair (n = 99) were measured using the comet assay. Multivariate linear regression was used to estimate regression coefficients and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for relationships between MET-hours per week of activity and each DNA outcome (damage, and 15- and 60-minute repair capacities). RESULTS: DNA damage was not associated with any measure of activity. However, 60-minute DNA repair was positively associated with both total activity (β = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.0057-0.412; P = .044) and high-intensity activity (β = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.20-0.60; P = .036), adjusting for age, sex, BMI, and current multivitamin use. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to assess broad ranges of activity intensity levels related to DNA damage and repair. Physical activity was unrelated to DNA damage but was associated with increased repair.
Authors: Swann Arp Adams; Charles E Matthews; Cara B Ebbeling; Charity G Moore; Joan E Cunningham; Jeanette Fulton; James R Hebert Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2005-02-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Luisa Soares-Miranda; Sandra Abreu; Marco Silva; Armando Peixoto; Rosa Ramalho; Pedro Correia da Silva; Carla Costa; João Paulo Teixeira; Carla Gonçalves; Pedro Moreira; Jorge Mota; Guilherme Macedo Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-10-11 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Kathleen M Sturgeon; Lorraine T Dean; Mariane Heroux; Jessica Kane; Toni Bauer; Erica Palmer; Jin Long; Shannon Lynch; Linda Jacobs; David B Sarwer; Mary B Leonard; Kathryn Schmitz Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-11-21 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Sung Keun Park; Ju Young Jung; Chang-Mo Oh; Min-Ho Kim; Eunhee Ha; Yeji Kim; Do Jin Nam; Jae-Hong Ryoo Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-09-27 Impact factor: 5.036
Authors: Elizabeth D Kantor; Cornelia M Ulrich; Robert W Owen; Peter Schmezer; Marian L Neuhouser; Johanna W Lampe; Ulrike Peters; Danny D Shen; Thomas L Vaughan; Emily White Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-08-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Gundula Behrens; Tobias Niedermaier; Mark Berneburg; Daniela Schmid; Michael F Leitzmann Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 3.240