Radiation effects on DNA content of cervical cancer cells: A rapid evaluation of radiation sensitivity by laser scanning cytometry

Fujiyoshi,Naoki; Ushijima,Kimio; Kawano,Kouichiro; Fujiyoshi,Keizo; Yamaguchi,Tomohiko; Araki,Yuko; Kakuma,Tatsuyuki; Watanabe,Sumiko; Kaku,Tsunehisa; Nishida,Takashi; Kamura,Toshiharu

doi:10.3892/mco.2014.413

Radiation effects on DNA content of cervical cancer cells: A rapid evaluation of radiation sensitivity by laser scanning cytometry

Authors:
- Naoki Fujiyoshi
- Kimio Ushijima
- Kouichiro Kawano
- Keizo Fujiyoshi
- Tomohiko Yamaguchi
- Yuko Araki
- Tatsuyuki Kakuma
- Sumiko Watanabe
- Tsunehisa Kaku
- Takashi Nishida
- Toshiharu Kamura
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Kurume University, Kurume, Fukuoka, Japan, Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Kurume University Hospital, Kurume University, Kurume, Japan, Department of Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Kurume University, Kurume, Japan, Department of Health Science, Faculty of Medicine, Kyushu University, Higashi‑ku, Fukuoka, Japan, Department of Gynecology, Oita Prefecture Saiseikai Hita Hospital, Hita, Oita, Japan
Published online on: September 9, 2014 https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.413
Pages: 51-54

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Since uterine cervical cancer is regarded as a radiosensive tumor, ionizing radiation is the most frequently used treatment modality against the disease. Although the crucial end‑point is radiation‑induced cell death, the tumors are not equally sensitive to radiation. Determining the criteria that may be used to predict tumor radiosensitivity is of importance; however, little success has been achieved thus far. In radioresistant cases the therapeutic strategy should be changed, thereby avoiding ineffective or unnecessary treatment. Furthermore, identification of the underlying molecular processes leading to radioresistance may lead to novel radiosensitising strategies. Cervical smears were obtained from seven patients with locally advanced cervical cancer following each radiotherapy, and the radiation‑induced damage of cancer tissue was examined by routine cytology. Since the formation of DNA double‑strand breaks is considered critical for the cytocidal effect of radiation therapy, the molecular changes of the neoplastic cells were also assessed by laser scanning cytometry (LSC). Radiation‑induced morphological changes of cancer cells were evident at a dose of 7.2 Gy, whereas increased DNA content (or DNA index) was observed prior to the onset of morphological changes. Molecular change was detected earlier than the morphological change of the irradiated cancer cells, indicating the feasibility of LSC in predicting the radiosensitivity of cervical cancer tissue.

View Figures

View References

1	Waqqoner SE: Cervical cancer. Lancet. 361:2217–2225. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar
2	Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J and Pisani P: Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer. 94:153–156. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Hu Q and Hill RP: Radiosensitivity, apoptosis and repair of DNA double-strand breaks in radiation-sensitive Chinese hamster ovary cell mutants treated at different dose rates. Radiat Res. 146:636–645. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar
4	Weichselbaum RR, Dahleberg W and Little JB: Inherently radioresistant cells exist in some human tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 82:4732–4735. 1985. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Steel GG, McMillan TJ and Peacock JH: The radiobiology of human cells and tissues. In vitro radiosensitivity. The picture has changed in the 1980s. Int J Radiat Biol. 56:525–537. 1989.
6	Ruiz de Almodóvar JM, Núñez MI, McMillan TJ, Olea C, Mort C, Villalobos M, Pedraza V and Steel GG: Initial radiation-induced DNA damage in human tumour cell lines: a correlation with intrinsic cellular radiosensitivity. Br J Cancer. 69:457–462. 1994.PubMed/NCBI
7	Kamentsky LA and Melamed MR: Spectrophotometer cell sorter. Science. 156:1364–1365. 1967. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Baatout S and Derradji H: Cytometric methods to analyze radiation effects. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 18:101–105. 2004.PubMed/NCBI
9	Ward JF: The yield of DNA double-strand breaks produced intracellulary by ionizing radiation: a review. Int J Radiat Biol. 57:1141–1150. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Brenner DJ and Ward JF: Constraints on energy deposition and target size of multiply damaged sites associated with DNA double-strand breaks. Int J Radiat Biol. 61:737–748. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Nikjoo H, O'Neill P, Wilson WE and Goodhead DT: Computational approach for determining the spectrum of DNA damage induced by ionizing radiation. Radiat Res. 156:577–583. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Datta K, Jaruga P, Dizdarglu M, Neumann RD and Winters TA: Molecular analysis of base damage clustering associated with a site-specific radiation-induced DNA double-strand break. Radiat Res. 166:767–781. 2006.
13	Kamentsky LA and Kamentsky LD: Microscope-based multiparameter laser scanning cytometer yielding data comparable to flow cytometry data. Cytometry. 12:381–387. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Kamentsky LA, Burger DE, Gershman RJ, Kamentsky LD and Luther E: Slide-based laser scanning cytometry. Acta Cytol. 41:123–143. 1997.PubMed/NCBI
15	Martin-Reay DG, Kamentsky LA, Weinberg DS, Hollister KA and Cibas ES: Evaluation of a new slide-based laser scanning cytometer for DNA analysis of tumors. Comparison with flow cytometry and image analysis. Am J Clin Pathol. 102:432–438. 1994.PubMed/NCBI
16	Darzynkiewicz Z, Juan G, Li X, Gorczyca W, Murakami T and Traganos F: Cytometry in cell necrobiology: analysis of apoptosis and accidental cell death (necrosis). Cytometry. 27:1–20. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Petignat P and Roy M: Diagnosis and management of cervical cancer. BMJ. 335:765–768. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar
18	Monfardini S, Brunner K, Crowther D, Olive D, MacDonald J, Eckhardt S and Whitehouse J: Manua. of Cancer Chemotherapy3rd. Union Internationale Contre le Cancer; Geneva: 1981
19	Gao Y, Ma JL and Song LP: The evaluation of older patients with cervical cancer. Clin Interv Aging. 8:783–788. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Bentzen SM and Hendry JH: Variability in the radiosensitivity of normal cells and tissues. Report from a workshop organised by the European Society for Therapeuic Radiology and Oncology in Edinburgh, UK, 19 September 1998. Int J Radiat Biol. 75:513–517. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar
21	Björk-Eriksson T, West C, Karlsson E and Mercke C: Tumor radiosensitivity (SF2) is a prognostic factor local control in head and neck cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 46:13–19. 2000.PubMed/NCBI
22	Baatout S, Derradji H, Jacquet P, Ooms D, Michaux A and Mergeay M: Enhanced radiation-induced apoptosis of cancer cell lines after treatment with resveratrol. Int J Mol Med. 13:895–902. 2004.PubMed/NCBI