DNA double strand breaks induced by low dose mammography X‑rays in breast tissue: A pilot study

Depuydt,Julie; Viaene,Tanguy; Blondeel,Phillip; Roche,Nathalie; Van den Broecke,Rudy; Thierens,Hubert; Vral,Anne

doi:10.3892/ol.2018.9024

DNA double strand breaks induced by low dose mammography X‑rays in breast tissue: A pilot study

Authors:
- Julie Depuydt
- Tanguy Viaene
- Phillip Blondeel
- Nathalie Roche
- Rudy Van den Broecke
- Hubert Thierens
- Anne Vral
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Ghent, 9000 Ghent, Belgium, Plastic Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium, Department of Uro‑Gynecology, University of Ghent, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
Published online on: June 26, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9024
Pages: 3394-3400

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

Breast tissue is very sensitive to ionizing radiation due to the presence of reproductive hormones, including estrogen. In the present pilot study, the efficiency of mammography X‑rays to induce DNA double strand breaks (DSB) in mammary epithelial cells was investigated. For this, freshly resected healthy breast tissue was irradiated with 30 kV mammography X‑rays in the dose range 0‑500 mGy (2, 4, 10, 20, 40, 100 and 500 mGy). Breast specimens were also irradiated with identical doses of 60Co γ‑rays as a radiation quality standard. With the γH2AX‑foci assay, the number of DNA DSB induced by radiation were quantified in the mammary epithelial cells present in breast tissue. Results indicated that foci induced by 30 kV X‑rays and γ‑rays followed a biphasic linear dose‑response. For 30 kV X‑rays, the slope in the low dose region (0‑20 mGy) was 8.71 times steeper compared with the slope in the higher dose region (20‑500 mGy). Furthermore, compared with γ‑rays, 30 kV X‑rays were also more effective in inducing γH2AX‑foci. This resulted in a relative biological effectiveness (RBE) value of 1.82 in the low dose range. In the higher dose range, an RBE close to 1 was obtained. In conclusion, the results indicated the existence of a low dose hypersensitive response for DSB induction in the dose range representative for mammography screening, which is probably caused by the bystander effect. This could affect the radiation risk calculations for women participating in mammography screening.

View Figures

View References

1	Altobelli E and Lattanzi A: Breast cancer in European Union: An update of screening programmes as of March 2014 (review). Int J Oncol. 45:1785–1792. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Klein R, Aichinger H, Dierker J, Jansen JT, Joite-Barfuss S, Säbel M, Schulz-Wendtland R and Zoetelief J: Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients. Phys Med Biol. 42:651–671. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, Hall EJ, Land CE, Little JB, Lubin JH, Preston DL, Preston RJ, Puskin JS, et al: Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 100:13761–13766. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Hendrick RE, Pisano ED, Averbukh A, Moran C, Berns EA, Yaffe MJ, Herman B, Acharyya S and Gatsonis C: Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 194:362–369. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection: ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 37:1–332. 2007.
6	Averbeck D: Does scientific evidence support a change from the LNT model for low-dose radiation risk extrapolation? Health Phys. 97:493–504. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Heyes GJ, Mill AJ and Charles MW: Mammography-oncogenecity at low doses. J Radiol Prot. 29:A123–A132. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Hunter N and Muirhead CR: Review of relative biological effectiveness dependence on linear energy transfer for low-LET radiations. J Radiol Prot. 29:5–21. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Leenhouts HP and Chadwick KH: Dose-effect relationships, epidemiological analysis and the derivation of low dose risk. J Radiol Prot. 31:95–105. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Rothkamm K and Löbrich M: Evidence for a lack of DNA double-strand break repair in human cells exposed to very low x-ray doses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 100:5057–5062. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Bakkenist CJ and Kastan MB: Initiating cellular stress responses. Cell. 118:9–17. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Grudzenski S, Raths A, Conrad S, Rübe CE and Löbrich M: Inducible response required for repair of low-dose radiation damage in human fibroblasts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 107:14205–14210. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Colin C, Devic C, Noël A, Rabilloud M, Zabot MT, Pinet-Isaac S, Giraud S, Riche B, Valette PJ, Rodriguez-Lafrasse C and Foray N: DNA double-strand breaks induced by mammographic screening procedures in human mammary epithelial cells. Int J Radiat Biol. 87:1103–1112. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Amundson SA, Lee RA, Koch-Paiz CA, Bittner ML, Meltzer P, Trent JM and Fornace AJ Jr: Differential responses of stress genes to low dose-rate gamma irradiation. Mol Cancer Res. 1:445–452. 2003.PubMed/NCBI
15	Franco N, Lamartine J, Frouin V, Le Minter P, Petat C, Leplat JJ, Libert F, Gidrol X and Martin MT: Low-dose exposure to gamma rays induces specific gene regulations in normal human keratinocytes. Radiat Res. 163:623–635. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Yang F, Stenoien DL, Strittmatter EF, Wang J, Ding L, Lipton MS, Monroe ME, Nicora CD, Gristenko MA, Tang K, et al: Phosphoproteome profiling of human skin fibroblast cells in response to low- and high-dose irradiation. J Proteome Res. 5:1252–1260. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	El-Saghire H, Thierens H, Monsieurs P, Michaux A, Vandevoorde C and Baatout S: Gene set enrichment analysis highlights different gene expression profiles in whole blood samples X-irradiated with low and high doses. Int J Radiat Biol. 89:628–638. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Kühne M, Urban G, Frankenberg D and Löbrich M: DNA double-strand break misrejoining after exposure of primary human fibroblasts to CK characteristic X rays, 29 kVp X rays and 60Co gamma rays. Radiat Res. 164:669–676. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Depuydt J, Baert A, Vandersickel V, Thierens H and Vral A: Relative biological effectiveness of mammography X-rays at the level of DNA and chromosomes in lymphocytes. Int J Radiat Biol. 89:532–538. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Mills CE, Thome C, Koff D, Andrews DW and Boreham DR: The relative biological effectiveness of low-dose mammography quality X rays in the human breast MCF-10A cell line. Radiat Res. 183:42–51. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Fucic A and Gamulin M: Interaction between ionizing radiation and estrogen: What we are missing? Med Hypotheses. 77:966–969. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Shao C, Folkard M, Held KD and Prise KM: Estrogen enhanced cell-cell signalling in breast cancer cells exposed to targeted irradiation. BMC Cancer. 8:1842008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Liehr JG: Genotoxicity of the steroidal oestrogens oestrone and oestradiol: Possible mechanism of uterine and mammary cancer development. Hum Reprod Update. 7:273–281. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Cavalieri E, Chakravarti D, Guttenplan J, Hart E, Ingle J, Jankowiak R, Muti P, Rogan E, Russo J, Santen R and Sutter T: Catechol estrogen quinones as initiators of breast and other human cancers: Implications for biomarkers of susceptibility and cancer prevention. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1766:63–78. 2006.PubMed/NCBI
25	Rogakou EP, Pilch DR, Orr AH, Ivanova VS and Bonner WM: DNA double-stranded breaks induce histone H2AX phosphorylation on serine 139. J Biol Chem. 273:5858–5868. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Rothkamm K and Horn S: gamma-H2AX as protein biomarker for radiation exposure. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 45:265–271. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
27	Averbeck D: Non-targeted effects as a paradigm breaking evidence. Mutat Res. 687:7–12. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Beyreuther E, Dörr W, Lehnert A, Lessmann E and Pawelke J: Relative biological effectiveness of 25 and 10 kV X-rays for the induction of chromosomal aberrations in two human mammary epithelial cell lines. Radiat Environ Biophys. 48:333–340. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Beyreuther E, Lessmann E, Pawelke J and Pieck S: DNA double-strand break signalling: X-ray energy dependence of residual co-localised foci of gamma-H2AX and 53BP1. Int J Radiat Biol. 85:1042–1050. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Lehnert A, Lessmann E, Pawelke J and Dörr W: RBE of 25 kV X-rays for the survival and induction of micronuclei in the human mammary epithelial cell line MCF-12A. Radiat Environ Biophys. 45:253–260. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
31	Roy R, Chun J and Powell SN: BRCA1 and BRCA2: Different roles in a common pathway of genome protection. Nat Rev Cancer. 12:68–78. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32	van Oorschot B, Hovingh S, Dekker A, Stalpers LJ and Franken NA: Predicting radiosensitivity with gamma-H2AX foci assay after single high-dose-rate and pulsed dose-rate ionizing irradiation. Radiat Res. 185:190–198. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Beels L, Bacher K, De Wolf D, Werbrouck J and Thierens H: gamma-H2AX foci as a biomarker for patient X-ray exposure in pediatric cardiac catheterization: Are we underestimating radiation risks? Circulation. 120:1903–1909. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Beels L, Werbrouck J and Thierens H: Dose response and repair kinetics of gamma-H2AX foci induced by in vitro irradiation of whole blood and T-lymphocytes with X- and gamma-radiation. Int J Radiat Biol. 86:760–768. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
35	Groesser T, Cooper B and Rydberg B: Lack of bystander effects from high-LET radiation for early cytogenetic end points. Radiat Res. 170:794–802. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Azzam EI, de Toledo SM and Little JB: Direct evidence for the participation of gap junction-mediated intercellular communication in the transmission of damage signals from alpha-particle irradiated to nonirradiated cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 98:473–478. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Azzam EI, de Toledo SM and Little JB: Stress signaling from irradiated to non-irradiated cells. Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 4:53–64. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
38	Hanot M, Hoarau J, Carrière M, Angulo JF and Khodja H: Membrane-dependent bystander effect contributes to amplification of the response to alpha-particle irradiation in targeted and nontargeted cells. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 75:1247–1253. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
39	Mothersill C and Seymour C: Radiation-induced bystander effects: Past history and future directions. Radiat Res. 155:759–767. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	Zhou H, Suzuki M, Geard CR and Hei TK: Effects of irradiated medium with or without cells on bystander cell responses. Mutat Res. 499:135–141. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
41	Lisowska H, Wegierek-Ciuk A, Banasik-Nowak A, Braziewicz J, Wojewodzka M, Wojcik A and Lankoff A: The dose-response relationship for dicentric chromosomes and γ-H2AX foci in human peripheral blood lymphocytes: Influence of temperature during exposure and intra- and inter-individual variability of donors. Int J Radiat Biol. 89:191–199. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
42	Dang L, Lisowska H, Manesh SS, Sollazzo A, Deperas-Kaminska M, Staaf E, Haghdoost S, Brehwens K and Wojcik A: Radioprotective effect of hypothermia on cells-a multiparametric approach to delineate the mechanisms. Int J Radiat Biol. 88:507–514. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI