Gene expression changes and DNA damage after ex vivo exposure of peripheral blood cells to various CT photon spectra.
Adult
Cluster Analysis
DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded
DNA Damage
Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation
Gene Expression Profiling
Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
Genomics
Histones
/ metabolism
Humans
Leukocytes, Mononuclear
/ cytology
Male
Middle Aged
Photons
Radiometry
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
/ methods
Tumor Suppressor p53-Binding Protein 1
/ metabolism
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 06 2021
08 06 2021
Historique:
received:
27
10
2020
accepted:
13
05
2021
entrez:
9
6
2021
pubmed:
10
6
2021
medline:
16
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Dual-energy CT provides enhanced diagnostic power with similar or even reduced radiation dose as compared to single-energy CT. Its principle is based on the distinct physical properties of low and high energetic photons, which, however, may also affect the biological effectiveness and hence the extent of CT-induced cellular damage. Therefore, a comparative analysis of biological effectiveness of dual- and single-energy CT scans with focus on early gene regulation and frequency of radiation-induced DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) was performed. Blood samples from three healthy individuals were irradiated ex vivo with single-energy (80 kV and 150 kV) and dual-energy tube voltages (80 kV/Sn150kV) employing a modern dual source CT scanner resulting in Volume Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDIvol) of 15.79-18.26 mGy and dose length product (DLP) of 606.7-613.8 mGy*cm. Non-irradiated samples served as a control. Differential gene expression in peripheral blood mononuclear cells was analyzed 6 h after irradiation using whole transcriptome sequencing. DSB frequency was studied by 53BP1 + γH2AX co-immunostaining and microscopic evaluation of their focal accumulation at DSBs. Neither the analysis of gene expression nor DSB frequency provided any evidence for significantly increased biological effectiveness of dual-energy CT in comparison to samples irradiated with particular single-energy CT spectra. Relative to control, irradiated samples were characterized by a significantly higher rate of DSBs (p < 0.001) and the shared upregulation of five genes, AEN, BAX, DDB2, FDXR and EDA2R, which have already been suggested as radiation-induced biomarkers in previous studies. Despite steadily decreasing doses, CT diagnostics remain a genotoxic stressor with impact on gene regulation and DNA integrity. However, no evidence was found that varying X-ray spectra of CT impact the extent of cellular damage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34103547
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-91023-7
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-91023-7
pmc: PMC8187728
doi:
Substances chimiques
H2AX protein, human
0
Histones
0
TP53BP1 protein, human
0
Tumor Suppressor p53-Binding Protein 1
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
12060Références
McCollough, C. H. et al. Principles and applications of multienergy CT: Report of AAPM task group 291. Med. Phys. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.14157 (2020).
doi: 10.1002/mp.14157
pubmed: 33202055
Goo, H. W. & Goo, J. M. Dual-energy CT: New horizon in medical imaging. Korean J. Radiol. 18, 555–569. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.4.555 (2017).
doi: 10.3348/kjr.2017.18.4.555
pubmed: 28670151
pmcid: 5447632
Takeuchi, M. et al. Split-bolus CT-urography using dual-energy CT: feasibility, image quality and dose reduction. Eur. J. Radiol. 81, 3160–3165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.05.005 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.05.005
pubmed: 22647423
Flors, L., Leiva-Salinas, C., Norton, P. T., Patrie, J. T. & Hagspiel, K. D. Endoleak detection after endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysm using dual-source dual-energy CT: Suitable scanning protocols and potential radiation dose reduction. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 200, 451–460. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.11.8033 (2013).
doi: 10.2214/ajr.11.8033
pubmed: 23345371
Buffa, V. et al. Dual-source dual-energy CT: dose reduction after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Radiol. Med. (Torino) 119, 934–941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-014-0420-1 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s11547-014-0420-1
Chen, C. Y. et al. Split-bolus portal venous phase dual-energy CT urography: Protocol design, image quality, and dose reduction. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 205, W492-501. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.14.13687 (2015).
doi: 10.2214/ajr.14.13687
pubmed: 26496571
Pulickal, G. G., Singh, D., Lohan, R. & Chawla, A. Dual-source dual-energy CT in submandibular sialolithiasis: Reliability and radiation burden. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 213, 1291–1296. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.19.21299 (2019).
doi: 10.2214/ajr.19.21299
pubmed: 31573848
Paget, V. et al. Multiparametric radiobiological assays show that variation of X-ray energy strongly impacts relative biological effectiveness: Comparison between 220 kV and 4 MV. Sci. Rep. 9, 14328. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50908-4 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-50908-4
pubmed: 31586152
pmcid: 6778087
Hill, M. A. The variation in biological effectiveness of X-rays and gamma rays with energy. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 112, 471–481. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/nch091 (2004).
doi: 10.1093/rpd/nch091
Hunter, N. & Muirhead, C. R. Review of relative biological effectiveness dependence on linear energy transfer for low-LET radiations. J. Radiol. Prot. 29, 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/29/1/r01 (2009).
doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/29/1/r01
pubmed: 19225189
Schmid, E., Regulla, D., Kramer, H.-M. & Harder, D. The effect of 29 kV X rays on the dose response of chromosome aberrations in human lymphocytes. Radiat. Res. 158, 771–777 (2002).
doi: 10.1667/0033-7587(2002)158[0771:TEOKXR]2.0.CO;2
Frankenberg, D., Kelnhofer, K., Bär, K. & Frankenberg-Schwager, M. Enhanced neoplastic transformation by mammography X Rays relative to 200 kVp X Rays: Indication for a strong dependence on photon energy of the RBEM for various end points. Radiat. Res. 157, 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1667/0033-7587(2002)157[0099:entbmx]2.0.co;2 (2002).
doi: 10.1667/0033-7587(2002)157[0099:entbmx]2.0.co;2
pubmed: 11754647
Göggelmann, W. et al. Re-evaluation of the RBE of 29 kV x-rays (mammography x-rays) relative to 220 kV x-rays using neoplastic transformation of human CGL1-hybrid cells. Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 42, 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-003-0210-y (2003).
doi: 10.1007/s00411-003-0210-y
pubmed: 14551783
Heyes, G. J. & Mill, A. J. The neoplastic transformation potential of mammography X rays and atomic bomb spectrum radiation. Radiat. Res. 162, 120–127. https://doi.org/10.1667/rr3212 (2004).
doi: 10.1667/rr3212
pubmed: 15387138
Brenner, D. J. & Amols, H. I. Enhanced risk from low-energy screen–film mammography X rays. Br. J. Radiol. 62, 910–914. https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-62-742-910 (1989).
doi: 10.1259/0007-1285-62-742-910
pubmed: 2819359
Frankenberg-Schwager, M. et al. Mutagenicity of low-filtered 30 kVp X-rays, mammography X-rays and conventional X-rays in cultured mammalian cells. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 78, 781–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/09553000210149777 (2002).
doi: 10.1080/09553000210149777
pubmed: 12428919
Słonina, D. et al. Induction of micronuclei in human fibroblasts and keratinocytes by 25 kV x-rays. Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 42, 55–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-003-0177-8 (2003).
doi: 10.1007/s00411-003-0177-8
pubmed: 12720002
Tao, S. M. et al. Comparison of the effect of radiation exposure from dual-energy CT versus single-energy CT on double-strand breaks at CT pulmonary angiography. Eur. J. Radiol. 101, 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.02.002 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.02.002
pubmed: 29571808
Eberlein, U., Peper, M., Fernández, M., Lassmann, M. & Scherthan, H. Calibration of the γ-H2AX DNA double strand break focus assay for internal radiation exposure of blood lymphocytes. PLoS ONE 10, e0123174. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123174 (2015).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123174
pubmed: 25853575
pmcid: 4390303
Schumann, S. et al. DNA damage in blood leukocytes of prostate cancer patients undergoing PET/CT examinations with [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA I&T. Cancers 12, 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12020388 (2020).
doi: 10.3390/cancers12020388
Sokolov, M. & Neumann, R. Global gene expression alterations as a crucial constituent of human cell response to low doses of ionizing radiation exposure. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 17, 55 (2016).
doi: 10.3390/ijms17010055
Paul, S. & Amundson, S. A. Development of gene expression signatures for practical radiation biodosimetry. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 71, 1236–1244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.043 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.043
pubmed: 18572087
pmcid: 2478639
Zheng, J. et al. Gene expression profiling in non-human primate jejunum, ileum and colon after total-body irradiation: A comparative study of segment-specific molecular and cellular responses. BMC Genom. 16, 984–984. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-015-2168-y (2015).
doi: 10.1186/s12864-015-2168-y
Kaatsch, H. L. et al. CT irradiation-induced changes of gene expression within peripheral blood cells. Health Phys. 119, 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0000000000001231 (2020).
doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001231
pubmed: 32167501
Allen, M. A. et al. Global analysis of p53-regulated transcription identifies its direct targets and unexpected regulatory mechanisms. Elife 3, e02200. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02200 (2014).
doi: 10.7554/eLife.02200
pubmed: 24867637
pmcid: 4033189
Jeay, S. et al. A distinct p53 target gene set predicts for response to the selective p53-HDM2 inhibitor NVP-CGM097. Elife https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06498 (2015).
doi: 10.7554/eLife.06498
pubmed: 25965177
pmcid: 4468608
Fischer, M. Census and evaluation of p53 target genes. Oncogene 36, 3943–3956. https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2016.502 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/onc.2016.502
pubmed: 28288132
pmcid: 5511239
Marková, E., Schultz, N. & Belyaev, I. Y. Kinetics and dose-response of residual 53BP1/gamma-H2AX foci: Co-localization, relationship with DSB repair and clonogenic survival. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 83, 319–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/09553000601170469 (2007).
doi: 10.1080/09553000601170469
pubmed: 17457757
Rothkamm, K. et al. DNA damage foci: Meaning and significance. Environ. Mol. Mutagen 56, 491–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/em.21944 (2015).
doi: 10.1002/em.21944
pubmed: 25773265
Jafarpour, S. M. et al. Evaluation of ameliorative potential of vitamins E and C on DNA double strand break (DSB) in patients undergoing computed tomography (CT): A clinical study. ijmcmed 7, 226–233. https://doi.org/10.22088/IJMCM.BUMS.7.4.226 (2018).
doi: 10.22088/IJMCM.BUMS.7.4.226
Halm, B. M. et al. γ-H2AX foci are increased in lymphocytes in vivo in young children 1 h after very low-dose X-irradiation: A pilot study. Pediatr. Radiol. 44, 1310–1317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-2983-3 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s00247-014-2983-3
pubmed: 24756254
pmcid: 4175172
Vandevoorde, C. et al. EPI-CT: in vitro assessment of the applicability of the gamma-H2AX-foci assay as cellular biomarker for exposure in a multicentre study of children in diagnostic radiology. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 91, 653–663. https://doi.org/10.3109/09553002.2015.1047987 (2015).
doi: 10.3109/09553002.2015.1047987
pubmed: 25968559
da Fonte, J. B., Andrade, T. M., Albuquerque, R. L. Jr., de Melo, M. F. B. & Takeshita, W. M. Evidence of genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of X-rays in the oral mucosa epithelium of adults subjected to cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 47, 20170160. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20170160 (2018).
doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20170160
pubmed: 29091472
Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8 (2014).
doi: 10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8
pubmed: 25516281
pmcid: 4302049
Patro, R., Duggal, G., Love, M. I., Irizarry, R. A. & Kingsford, C. Salmon provides fast and bias-aware quantification of transcript expression. Nat. Methods https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4197 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/nmeth.4197
pubmed: 28263959
pmcid: 5600148
Soneson, C., Love, M. I. & Robinson, M. D. Differential analyses for RNA-seq: transcript-level estimates improve gene-level inferences. F1000Research https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7563.2 (2016).
doi: 10.12688/f1000research.7563.2
pmcid: 4712774
Heberle, H., Meirelles, G. V., da Silva, F. R., Telles, G. P. & Minghim, R. InteractiVenn: A web-based tool for the analysis of sets through Venn diagrams. BMC Bioinform. 16, 169. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-015-0611-3 (2015).
doi: 10.1186/s12859-015-0611-3
Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: Tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25(1), 25–29 (2000).
doi: 10.1038/75556
Mi, H., Muruganujan, A., Ebert, D., Huang, X. & Thomas, P. D. PANTHER version 14: More genomes, a new PANTHER GO-slim and improvements in enrichment analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky1038 (2019).
doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1038
pubmed: 31114915
pmcid: 6735771
Barrett, T. et al. NCBI GEO: Archive for functional genomics data sets–update. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D991-995. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1193 (2013).
doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1193
pubmed: 23193258
Edgar, R., Domrachev, M. & Lash, A. E. Gene Expression Omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 207–210. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/30.1.207 (2002).
doi: 10.1093/nar/30.1.207
pubmed: 11752295
pmcid: 99122
Lamkowski, A. et al. DNA damage focus analysis in blood samples of minipigs reveals acute partial body irradiation. PLoS ONE 9, e87458. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087458 (2014).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087458
pubmed: 24498326
pmcid: 3911974