Extending culture time to improve Mitotic Index for cytogenetic dosimetry

References

• Amaral A, De Lima S, Silva L, Lemos-Pinto M, Lucena L, Marques-Salles T, Silva E, Magnata S. 2019. A new methodology for diagnosis of Fanconi anemia based on biological dosimetry. Arch Biosci Heal. 1(2):189–200.
   Google Scholar
• Averbeck D, Candéias S, Chandna S, Foray N, Friedl AA, Haghdoost S, Jeggo PA, Lumniczky K, Paris F, Quintens R, et al. 2019. Establishing mechanisms affecting the individual response to ionizing radiation. Int J Radiat Biol. 96(3):297–323. doi:10.1080/09553002.2019.1704908
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balakrishnan S, Shirsath k, Bhat N, Anjaria K. 2010. Biodosimetry for high dose accidental exposures by drug induced premature chromosome condensation (PCC) assay. Mutat Res. 699(1–2):11–16. doi:10.1016/j.mrgentox.2010.03.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaton LA, Ferrarotto C, Marro L, Samiee S, Malone S, Grimes S, Malone K, Wilkins RC. 2013. Chromosome damage and cell proliferation rates in in vitro irradiated whole blood as markers of late radiation toxicity after radiation therapy to the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol. 85(5):1346–1352. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.09.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bender MA, Gooch PC. 1962. Persistent chromosome aberrations in irradiated human subjects. Radiat Res. 16(1):44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3571128?origin=crossref.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bender MA, Prescott DM. 1962. DNA synthesis and mitosis in cultures of human peripheral leukocytes. Exp Cell Res. 27(2):221–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Berg J, Manjón AG, Kielbassa K, Feringa FM, Freire R, Medema RH. 2018. A limited number of double-strand DNA breaks is sufficient to delay cell cycle progression. Nucleic Acids Res. 46(19):10132–10144. doi:10.1093/nar/gky786
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhattacharyya B, Panda D, Gupta S, Banerjee M. 2008. Anti-mitotic activity of colchicine and the structural basis for its interaction with tubulin. Med Res Rev. 28(1):155–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgmann K, Hoeller U, Nowack S, Bernhard M, Röper B, Brackrock S, Petersen C, Szymczak S, Ziegler A, Feyer P, et al. 2008. Individual radiosensitivity measured with lymphocytes may predict the risk of acute reaction after radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 71(1):256–264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casella G. 2008. Statistical design. New York, NY: Springer New York. 10.1007/978-0-387-75965-4.
   Google Scholar
• Chao HX, Poovey CE, Privette AA, Grant GD, Chao HY, Cook JG, Purvis JE. 2017. Orchestration of dna damage checkpoint dynamics across the human cell cycle. Cell Syst. 5(5):445–459.e5. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2405471217304362. doi:10.1016/j.cels.2017.09.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen D q, Zhang C y 1992. A simple and convenient method for gaining pure populations of lymphocytes at the first mitotic division in vitro. Mutat Res Lett. 282(3):227–229.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chen Y, Yan XK, Du J, Wang ZD, Zhang XQ, Zeng FG, Zhou PK. 2011. Biological dose estimation for accidental supra-high dose gamma-ray exposure. Radiat Meas. 46(9):837–841.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chua MLK, Somaiah N, A'Hern R, Davies S, Gothard L, Yarnold J, Rothkamm K. 2011. Residual DNA and chromosomal damage in ex vivo irradiated blood lymphocytes correlated with late normal tissue response to breast radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 99(3):362–366. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2011.05.071
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deperas J, Szłuíska M, Deperas-Kaminska M, Edwards A, Lloyd D, Lindholm C, Romm H, Roy L, Moss R, Morand J, et al. 2007. CABAS: A freely available PC program for fitting calibration curves in chromosome aberration dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 124(2):115–123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derrick B, Ruck A, Toher D, White P. 2018. Tests for equality of variances between two samples which contain both paired observations and independent observations. J Appl Quant Methods. 13(2):36–47.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards A, Voisin P, Sorokine-Durm I, Maznik N, Vinnikov V, Mikhalevich L, Moquet J, Lloyd D, Delbos M, Durand V. 2004. Biological estimates of dose to inhabitants of Belarus and Ukraine following the Chernobyl accident. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 111(2):211–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandes TS, Loyd DC, Amaral A. 2008. Biodosimetry for dose assessment of partial-body exposure: a methodological improvement. Brazilian Arch Biol Technol. 51(SPECIALISSUE):97–102.
   Google Scholar
• Florian S, Mitchison TJ. 2016. Anti-microtubule drugs. Methods Mol Biol. 1413:403–421. 10.1007/978-1-4939-3542-0_25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Giussani A, Lopez MA, Romm H, Testa A, Ainsbury EA, Degteva M, Della Monaca S, Etherington G, Fattibene P, Güclu I, et al. 2020. Eurados review of retrospective dosimetry techniques for internal exposures to ionising radiation and their applications. Radiat Environ Biophys. 59(3):357–387. doi:10.1007/s00411-020-00845-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. 2018. Radiobiology for the radiologist. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health.
   Google Scholar
• Heimers A, Brede HJ, Giesen U, Hoffmann W. 2006. Chromosome aberration analysis and the influence of mitotic delay after simulated partial-body exposure with high doses of sparsely and densely ionising radiation. Radiat Environ Biophys. 45(1):45–54. doi:10.1007/s00411-006-0036-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henegariu O, Heerema NA, Wright LL, Bray-Ward P, Ward DC, Vance GH. 2001. Improvements in cytogenetic slide preparation: Controlled chromosome spreading, chemical aging and gradual denaturing. Cytometry. 43(2):101–109. doi:10.1002/1097-0320(20010201)43:2<101::AID-CYTO1024>3.0.CO;2-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Herate C, Sabatier L. 2020. Retrospective biodosimetry techniques: Focus on cytogenetics assays for individuals exposed to ionizing radiation. Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res. 783:108287. doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2019.108287
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Atomic Energy Agency. 2005. Generic procedures for medical response during a nuclear or radiological emergency. Vienna: IAEA.
   Google Scholar
• International Atomic Energy Agency. 2006. Manual for first responders to a radiological emergency. Vienna: IAEA.
   Google Scholar
• International Atomic Energy Agency. 2011. Cytogenetic dosimetry : applications in preparedness for and response to radiation emergencies. Vienna: IAEA.
   Google Scholar
• International Atomic Energy Agency. 2020. Guidance for medical physicists responding to a nuclear or radiological emergency, emergency preparedness and response. Vienna: IAEA.
   Google Scholar
• Kaddour A, Colicchio B, Buron D, El Maalouf E, Laplagne E, Borie C, Ricoul M, Lenain A, Hempel WM, Morat L, et al. 2017. Transmission of induced chromosomal aberrations through successive mitotic divisions in human lymphocytes after in vitro and vivo radiation. Sci Rep. 7(1):3291. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-03198-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kanda R, Hayata I, Lloyd DC. 1999. Easy biodosimetry for high-dose radiation exposures using drug-induced, prematurely condensed chromosomes. Int J Radiat Biol. 75(4):441–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanda R, Jiang T, Hayata I, Kobayashi S. 1994. Effects of colcemid concentration on chromosome aberration analysis in human lymphocytes. J Radiat Res. 35(1):41–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karachristou I, Karakosta M, Pantelias A, Hatzi V, Pantelias G, Thanassoulas A, Karaiskos P, Dimitriou P, Terzoudi GI. 2016. Biodosimetry for high-dose exposures based on dicentric analysis in lymphocytes released from the g2-block by caffeine. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 172(1–3):230–237. doi:10.1093/rpd/ncw151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khvostunov IK, Snigiryova GP, Moiseenko VV, Lloyd DC. 2015. A follow-up cytogenetic studyofworkers highly exposed inside the chernobyl sarcophagus. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 167(4):405–418. doi:10.1093/rpd/ncu351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishnaja AP, Sharma NK. 2004. Transmission of γ-ray-induced unstable chromosomal aberrations through successive mitotic divisions in human lymphocytes in vitro. Mutagenesis. 19(4):299–305. doi:10.1093/mutage/geh031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulka U, Wojcik A, Di Giorgio M, Wilkins R, Suto Y, Jang S, Quing-Jie L, Jiaxiang L, Ainsbury E, Woda C, et al. 2018. Biodosimetry and biodosimetry networks for managing radiation emergency. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 182(1):128–138. doi:10.1093/rpd/ncy137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamadrid AI, García O, Delbos M, Voisin P, Roy L. 2007. PCC-ring induction in human lymphocytes exposed to gamma and neutron irradiation. J Radiat Res. 48(1):1–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemos-Pinto MMP, Cadena M, Santos N, Fernandes TS, Borges E, Amaral A. 2015. A dose-response curve for biodosimetry from a 6 MV electron linear accelerator. Brazilian J Med Biol Res. 48(10):908–914.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Lemos Pinto MMP, Santos NFG, Amaral A. 2010. Current status of biodosimetry based on standard cytogenetic methods. Radiat Environ Biophys. 49(4):567–581. doi:10.1007/s00411-010-0311-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maznik NA, Vinnikov VA, Lloyd DC, Edwards AA. 1997. Chromosomal dosimetry for some groups of evacuees from Prypiat and Ukranian liquidators at Chernobyl. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 74(1–2):5–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moiseenko V, Khvostunov IK, Hattangadi-Gluth JA, Muren LP, Lloyd DC. 2016. Biological dosimetry to assess risks of health effects in victims of radiation accidents: thirty years after Chernobyl. Radiother Oncol. 119(1):1–4. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2016.02.033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moquet J, Rothkamm K, Barnard S, Ainsbury E. 2020. Radiation biomarkers in large scale human health effects studies. J Pers Med. 10(4):1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pernot E, Hall J, Baatout S, Benotmane MA, Blanchardon E, Bouffler S, El Saghire H, Gomolka M, Guertler A, Harms-Ringdahl M, et al. 2012. Ionizing radiation biomarkers for potential use in epidemiological studies. Mutat Res. 751(2):258–286. doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2012.05.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry P, Wolff S. 1974. New Giemsa method for the differential staining of sister chromatids. Nature. 251(5471):156–158. http://www.nature.com/articles/251156a0. doi:10.1038/251156a0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pujol M, Puig R, Caballín MR, Barrios L, Barquinero JF. 2012. The use of caffeine to assess high dose exposures to ionising radiation by dicentric analysis. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 149(4):392–398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purrott RJ, Vulpis N, Lloyd DC. 1980. The use of harlequin staining to measure delay in the human lymphocyte cell cycle induced by in vitro X-irradiation. Mutat Res Mol Mech Mutagen. 69(2):275–282.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Purrott RJ, Vulpis N, Lloyd DC. 1981a. The influence of incubation temperature on the rate of human lymphocyte proliferation in vitro. Experientia. 37(4):407–408. doi:10.1007/BF01959890
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Purrott RJ, Vulpis N, Lloyd DC. 1981b. Chromosome dosimetry: the influence of culture media on the proliferation of irradiated and unirradiated human lymphocytes. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 1(3):203–208.
   Google Scholar
• Razali NM, Wah YB. 2011. Power comparisons of Shapiro–Wilk, Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson–Darling tests. J Stat Model Anal. 2(1):21–33.
   Google Scholar
• Roy L, Gregoire E, Gruel G, Roch-Lefevre S, Voisin P, Busset A, Martin C, Voisin P. 2012. Effect of lymphocytes culture variations on the Mitotic Index and on the dicentric yield following gamma radiation exposure. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 151(1):135–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakamoto-Hojo ET. 2018. Lessons from the accident with 137Cesium in Goiania, Brazil: Contributions to biological dosimetry in case of human exposure to ionizing radiation. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 836(Pt A):72–77. doi:10.1016/j.mrgentox.2018.05.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santivasi WL, Xia F. 2014. Ionizing radiation-induced DNA damage, response, and repair. Antioxidants Redox Signal. 21(2):251–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scully R, Panday A, Elango R, Willis NA. 2019. DNA double-strand break repair-pathway choice in somatic mammalian cells. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 20(11):698–714. doi:10.1038/s41580-019-0152-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seeber A, Hauer MH, Gasser SM. 2018. Chromosome dynamics in response to DNA damage. Annu Rev Genet. 52(1):295–319. doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-120417-031334
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sevan’kaev AV, Lloyd DC, Braselmann H, Edwards AA, Moiseenko VV, Zhloba AA. 1995. A Survey of chromosomal aberrations in lymphocytes of Chernobyl liquidators. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 58(2):85–91. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a082602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sevan’kaev AV, Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Khvostunov IK, Mikhailova GF, Golub EV, Shepel NN, Nadejina NM, Galstian IA, Nugis VY, et al. 2005. A cytogenetic follow-up of some highly irradiated victims of the Chernobyl accident. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 113(2):152–161. doi:10.1093/rpd/nch435
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sevan’kaev AV, Lloyd DC, Edwards AA, Moiseenko VV. 1995. High exposures to radiation received by workers inside the Chernobyl sarcophagus. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 59(2):85–91. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a082641
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaltiel IA, Krenning L, Bruinsma W, Medema RH. 2015. The same, only different – DNA damage checkpoints and their reversal throughout the cell cycle. J Cell Sci. 128(4):607–620.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun M, Moquet J, Barnard S, Lloyd D, Ainsbury E. 2020. A simplified Calyculin A-induced premature chromosome condensation (PCC) protocol for the biodosimetric analysis of high-dose exposure to gamma radiation. Radiat Res. 193(6):560–568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinnikov V, Belyakov O. 2022. Clinical applications of biological dosimetry in patients exposed to low dose radiation due to radiological, imaging or nuclear medicine procedures. Semin Nucl Med. 52(2):114–139. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2021.11.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinnikov V, Hande MP, Wilkins R, Wojcik A, Zubizarreta E, Belyakov O. 2020. Prediction of the acute or late radiation toxicity effects in radiotherapy patients using ex vivo induced biodosimetric markers: a review. J Pers Med. 10(4):285. doi:10.3390/jpm10040285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinnikov VA, Ainsbury EA, Maznyk NA, Lloyd DC, Rothkamm K. 2010. Limitations associated with analysis of cytogenetic data for biological dosimetry. Radiat Res. 174(4):403–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinnikov VA, Belyakov O. 2020. Radiation exposure biomarkers in the practice of medical radiology: Cooperative Research and the Role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Biodosimetry/Radiobiology Laboratory. Health Phys. 119(1):83–94. doi:10.1097/HP.0000000000001266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinnikov VA, Maznyk NA. 2013. Cytogenetic dose-response in vitro for biological dosimetry after exposure to high doses of gamma-rays. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 154(2):186–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waterman DP, Haber JE, Smolka MB. 2020. Checkpoint responses to DNA double-strand breaks. Annu Rev Biochem. 89(1):103–133. doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-011520-104722
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wenzel ES, Singh ATK. 2018. Cell-cycle checkpoints and aneuploidy on the path to cancer. In Vivo. 32(1):1–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao B, Jiang BR, Ai HS, Li YF, Liu GX, Man QH, Qiu LJ. 2010. Biological dose estimation for two severely exposed patients in a radiation accident in Shandong Jining, China, in 2004. Int J Radiat Biol. 86(9):800–808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar