Hide metadata

dc.date.accessioned2023-02-14T16:09:05Z
dc.date.available2023-02-14T16:09:05Z
dc.date.created2023-01-05T11:57:54Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationBrunborg, Gunnar Eide, Dag Markus Graupner, Anne Gutzkow, Kristine Bjerve Shaposhnikov, Sergey Kruszewski, Marcin Sirota, Nikolay Jones, George D. D. Koppen, Gudrun Vanhavere, Filip Møller, Peter Stetina, Rudolf Dahl, Hildegunn Collins, Andrew Richard Sherman . Calibration of the comet assay using ionising radiation. Mutation Research. Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis. 2022, 885
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/99925
dc.description.abstractSeveral trials have attempted to identify sources of inter-laboratory variability in comet assay results, aiming at achieving more equal responses. Ionising radiation induces a defined level of DNA single-strand breaks (per dose/base pairs) and is used as a reference when comparing comet results but relies on accurately determined radiation doses. In this ring test we studied the significance of dose calibrations and comet assay protocol differences, with the object of identifying causes of variability and how to deal with them. Eight participating laboratories, using either x-ray or gamma radiation units, measured dose rates using alanine pellet dosimeters that were subsequently sent to a specialised laboratory for analysis. We found substantial deviations between calibrated and nominal (uncalibrated) dose rates, with up to 46% difference comparing highest and lowest values. Three additional dosimetry systems were employed in some laboratories: thermoluminescence detectors and two aqueous chemical dosimeters. Fricke’s and Benzoic Acid dosimetry solutions gave reliable quantitative dose estimations using local equipment. Mononuclear cells from fresh human blood or mammalian cell lines were irradiated locally with calibrated (alanine) radiation doses and analysed for DNA damage using a standardised comet assay protocol and a lab-specific protocol. The dose response of eight laboratories, calculated against calibrated radiation doses, was linear with slope variance CV= 29% with the lab-specific protocol, reduced to CV= 16% with the standard protocol. Variation between laboratories indicate post-irradiation repair differences. Intra-laboratory variation was very low judging from the dose response of 8 donors (CV=4%). Electrophoresis conditions were different in the lab-specific protocols explaining some dose response variations which were reduced by systematic corrections for electrophoresis conditions. The study shows that comet assay data obtained in different laboratories can be compared quantitatively using calibrated radiation doses and that systematic corrections for electrophoresis conditions are useful.
dc.languageEN
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleCalibration of the comet assay using ionising radiation
dc.title.alternativeENEngelskEnglishCalibration of the comet assay using ionising radiation
dc.typeJournal article
dc.creator.authorBrunborg, Gunnar
dc.creator.authorEide, Dag Markus
dc.creator.authorGraupner, Anne
dc.creator.authorGutzkow, Kristine Bjerve
dc.creator.authorShaposhnikov, Sergey
dc.creator.authorKruszewski, Marcin
dc.creator.authorSirota, Nikolay
dc.creator.authorJones, George D. D.
dc.creator.authorKoppen, Gudrun
dc.creator.authorVanhavere, Filip
dc.creator.authorMøller, Peter
dc.creator.authorStetina, Rudolf
dc.creator.authorDahl, Hildegunn
dc.creator.authorCollins, Andrew Richard Sherman
cristin.unitcode185,51,13,0
cristin.unitnameAvdeling for ernæringsvitenskap
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.cristin2101205
dc.identifier.bibliographiccitationinfo:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.jtitle=Mutation Research. Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis&rft.volume=885&rft.spage=&rft.date=2022
dc.identifier.jtitleMutation Research. Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis
dc.identifier.volume885
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2022.503560
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.source.issn1383-5718
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
cristin.articleid503560
dc.relation.projectANDRE/COST Action CA15132 (hCOMET)
dc.relation.projectEU/LSHB-CT-2006-037575
dc.relation.projectNFR/223268


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 4.0 International
This item's license is: Attribution 4.0 International