Jinhua Wu1, Tom K Hei1,2. 1. a Center for Radiological Research, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University , New York , NY , USA. 2. b Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health , Columbia University , New York , NY , USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Even though the first ultraviolet microbeam was described by S. Tschachotin back in 1912, the development of sophisticated micro-irradiation facilities only began to flourish in the late 1980s. In this article, we highlight significant microbeam experiments, describe the latest microbeam irradiator configurations and critical discoveries made by using the microbeam apparatus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Modern radiological microbeams facilities are capable of producing a beam size of a few micrometers, or even tens of nanometers in size, and can deposit radiation with high precision within a cellular target. In the past three decades, a variety of microbeams has been developed to deliver a range of radiations including charged particles, X-rays, and electrons. Despite the original intention for their development to measure the effects of a single radiation track, the ability to target radiation with microbeams at sub-cellular targets has been extensively used to investigate radiation-induced biological responses within cells. RESULTS: Studies conducted using microbeams to target specific cells in a tissue have elucidated bystander responses, and further studies have shown reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) play critical roles in the process. The radiation-induced abscopal effect, which has a profound impact on cancer radiotherapy, further reaffirmed the importance of bystander effects. Finally, by targeting sub-cellular compartments with a microbeam, we have reported cytoplasmic-specific biological responses. Despite the common dogma that nuclear DNA is the primary target for radiation-induced cell death and carcinogenesis, studies conducted using microbeam suggested that targeted cytoplasmic irradiation induces mitochondrial dysfunction, cellular stress, and genomic instability. A more recent development in microbeam technology includes application of mouse models to visualize in vivo DNA double-strand breaks. CONCLUSIONS: Microbeams are making important contributions towards our understanding of radiation responses in cells and tissue models.
PURPOSE: Even though the first ultraviolet microbeam was described by S. Tschachotin back in 1912, the development of sophisticated micro-irradiation facilities only began to flourish in the late 1980s. In this article, we highlight significant microbeam experiments, describe the latest microbeam irradiator configurations and critical discoveries made by using the microbeam apparatus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Modern radiological microbeams facilities are capable of producing a beam size of a few micrometers, or even tens of nanometers in size, and can deposit radiation with high precision within a cellular target. In the past three decades, a variety of microbeams has been developed to deliver a range of radiations including charged particles, X-rays, and electrons. Despite the original intention for their development to measure the effects of a single radiation track, the ability to target radiation with microbeams at sub-cellular targets has been extensively used to investigate radiation-induced biological responses within cells. RESULTS: Studies conducted using microbeams to target specific cells in a tissue have elucidated bystander responses, and further studies have shown reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) play critical roles in the process. The radiation-induced abscopal effect, which has a profound impact on cancer radiotherapy, further reaffirmed the importance of bystander effects. Finally, by targeting sub-cellular compartments with a microbeam, we have reported cytoplasmic-specific biological responses. Despite the common dogma that nuclear DNA is the primary target for radiation-induced cell death and carcinogenesis, studies conducted using microbeam suggested that targeted cytoplasmic irradiation induces mitochondrial dysfunction, cellular stress, and genomic instability. A more recent development in microbeam technology includes application of mouse models to visualize in vivo DNA double-strand breaks. CONCLUSIONS: Microbeams are making important contributions towards our understanding of radiation responses in cells and tissue models.
Authors: M Folkard; B Vojnovic; K J Hollis; A G Bowey; S J Watts; G Schettino; K M Prise; B D Michael Journal: Int J Radiat Biol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 2.694
Authors: M Buonanno; G Randers-Pehrson; L B Smilenov; N J Kleiman; E Young; B Ponnayia; D J Brenner Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2015-07-24 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Alan Bigelow; Guy Garty; Tomoo Funayama; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; David Brenner; Charles Geard Journal: J Radiat Res Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 2.724