Literature DB >> 8833620

DNA repair capacity correlates with mutagen sensitivity in lymphoblastoid cell lines.

Q Wei1, M R Spitz, J Gu, L Cheng, X Xu, S S Strom, M L Kripke, T C Hsu.   

Abstract

This study describes a correlation between cellular DNA repair capacity and the frequency of mutagen-induced in vitro chromosomal breaks in selected lymphoblastoid cell lines. Two assays, host cell reactivation (HCR) assay for measuring cellular DNA repair capacity and in vitro mutagen sensitivity assay, have recently been shown to be useful biomarkers for such susceptibility. Increased in vitro mutagen sensitivity, measured by the number of induced chromatid breaks, has been postulated to reflect decreased capacity of DNA repair, as measured by the HCR assay. However, these two assays have not been examined in parallel to test this hypothesis. In this study, we performed both assays in 16 established lymphoblastoid cell lines derived from patients with xeroderma pigmentosum (n = 3), ataxia telangiectasia (n = 2), head and neck cancer (n = 3), and melanoma (n = 2), and from normal human subjects (n = 6) using UV light, 4-nitroquinoline-1-oxide (4-NQO; an UV-mimetic agent), and gamma-irradiation as the test agents. The measurements from the HCR assay correlated significantly with the frequency of chromatid breaks induced by either UV irradiation (r = -0.69; P < 0.01) or 4-NQO (r = -0.70; P < 0.01). Although published data suggest that damage induced by UV and 4-NQO may be repaired by different pathways, the two agents induced similar frequencies of chromatid breaks (r = 0.68; P < 0.01) in the tested cell lines. Our results also indicated that the HCR assay is not suitable to test agents that cause DNA strand breaks, such as gamma-irradiation, whereas the mutagen sensitivity assay is. Although reduced cellular DNA repair capacity correlated with increased frequency of mutagen-induced chromatid breaks in these cell lines, these two assays have different sensitivities in measuring the repair of damage induced by different carcinogens; therefore, the use of both assays is recommended for future molecular epidemiological studies of cancer susceptibility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8833620

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  6 in total

1.  Prospective analysis of DNA damage and repair markers of lung cancer risk from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial.

Authors:  Alice J Sigurdson; Irene M Jones; Qingyi Wei; Xifeng Wu; Margaret R Spitz; Douglas A Stram; Myron D Gross; Wen-Yi Huang; Li-E Wang; Jian Gu; Cynthia B Thomas; Douglas J Reding; Richard B Hayes; Neil E Caporaso
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2010-10-07       Impact factor: 4.944

2.  DNA repair capacity in healthy medical students during and after exam stress.

Authors:  L Cohen; G D Marshall; L Cheng; S K Agarwal; Q Wei
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2000-12

Review 3.  DNA repair phenotype and cancer susceptibility--a mini review.

Authors:  Chunying Li; Li-E Wang; Qingyi Wei
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 7.396

4.  High γ-radiation sensitivity is associated with increased gastric cancer risk in a Chinese Han population: a case-control analysis.

Authors:  Honglin Dong; Xiaowei Jin; Jie Hu; Haifeng Li; Xianli He; Xiaonan Liu; Guoqiang Bao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Breast cancer stem cell-like cells are more sensitive to ionizing radiation than non-stem cells: role of ATM.

Authors:  Seog-Young Kim; Juong G Rhee; Xinxin Song; Edward V Prochownik; Douglas R Spitz; Yong J Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Lymphoblastoid Cell lines: a Continuous in Vitro Source of Cells to Study Carcinogen Sensitivity and DNA Repair.

Authors:  Tabish Hussain; Rita Mulherkar
Journal:  Int J Mol Cell Med       Date:  2012
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.