Effects of brachytherapy on cytogenetic parameters and oxidative status in peripheral blood lymphocytes of gynecologic cancer patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32471/exp-oncology.2312-8852.vol-43-no-3.16514Keywords:
192Ir high-dose-rate sources, cytogenetic analysis, high-energy high-dose-rate brachytherapy, peripheral blood lymphocytes, radiation-induced chromosome aberrationsAbstract
Summary. Background: The state-of-the-art brachytherapy technologies with high-dose sources of 60Co and 192Ir within contemporary treatment protocols for cancer patients allow achieving maximum dose distribution in the clinical target and with minimum radiation exposure of surrounding organs and tissues. For minimization and overcoming the early and late radiation complications, development of respective radiobiological criteria along with perfecting of physical and technical characteristics of the ionizing radiation sources are required. Aim: To study the effect of 192Ir radiation on the chromosomal aberrations and prooxidant/antioxidant status of blood lymphocytes in gynecological cancer patients. Materials and Methods: The patients (n = 45) with endometrial, cervical and secondary cancer of vagina were enrolled in the study. For brachytherapy, the irradiation of vaginal mucosa was conducted using “GammaMed plus” device for contact radiation therapy with 192Ir source. Prior to irradiation and in 20–24 h after brachytherapy session, the venous blood samples were obtained and peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) were cultured for cytogenetic analysis. The prooxidant/antioxidant status was determined in hemolysates by the method of hydrogen peroxide-induced chemiluminescence. Results: The average level of spontaneous chromosome aberrations in PBL of the patients was (7.8 ± 0.4) per 100 metaphases, which is more than twice higher than the upper limit of the average population values. The frequency of chromosome aberrations in PBL of patients after brachytherapy session was (15.3 ± 1.0) per 100 metaphases. An increased intensity of O2- generation by PBL after brachytherapy session was also noticed. Conclusion: Local irradiation at a dose of 6 Gy featuring the first dose fraction of brachytherapy induces extra chromosomal aberrations in PBL of gynecological cancer patients and intensifies prooxidant processes in the blood.
References
Ivankova VS, Domina EA. Tumor Resistance Issues in Radiation Oncology. Kyiv: Zdorovya, 2012. 190 p (in Russian).
Grinevych YuA, Domina EA. Immune and Cytogenetic Effects of Densely and Sparsely Ionizing Radiation. Kyiv: Zdorovya, 2006. 200 p (in Russian).
Mazurik VK, Moroz B. Radiobiology issues and P53 protein. Rad Biol Radioecol 2001; 41: 548–54 (in Russian).
Holch P, Henry AM, Davidson S, et al. Acute and late adverse events associated with radical radiation therapy prostate cancer treatment: A systematic review of clinician and patient toxicity reporting in randomized controlled trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 97: 495–510.
Deloch L, Derer A, Hartmann J, et al. Modern radiotherapy concepts and the impact of radiation on immune activation. Front Oncol 2016; 6: 141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2016.00141.
Domina EA, Pilinskaya MA, Petunin YuI, Klushin DA. Radiation Cytogenetics. Kyiv: Zdorovya, 2009. 368 p (in Russian).
Chargari C, Deutsch E, Blanchard P, et al. Brachytherapy: An overview for clinicians. CA Cancer J Clin 2019; 69: 386–401.
Dale RG, Deehan C. Brachytherapy. In: Radiobiological Modeling in Radiation Oncology. Dale R., Jones B., eds. London: Br Inst Radiobiology, 2007: 113–7.
Pop LA, Miller WT, Pias M, Kogel AJ. Radiation tolerance of rat spinal cord to pulsed dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy: the impact of differences in temporal dose distribution hach. Radiother Oncol 2000; 55: 301–5.
International Atomic Energy Agency. Biological dosimetry: Chromosomal aberrations analysis for dose assessment. Technical Reports series No. 260. Vienna: IAEA; 1986. 69 p.
Druzhina MO, Domina EA, Makovetska LI. Metabolites of oxidative stress as predictors of radiation and carcinogenic risks. Oncologiya 2019; 21: 170–5 (in Ukrainian).
International Atomic Energy Agency. Cytogenetic dosimetry: Applications in preparedness for and response to radiation emergencies. Vienna: IAEA; 2011. 232 p.
Serkiz YaI, Druzhina NA, Khriyenko AP, et al. Blood chemiluminescence under radiation exposure. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka Publ; 1989. 176 p (in Russian).
Liochev SI, Fridovich I. Lucigenin (bis-N-methylacridinium) as a mediator of superoxide anion production. Arch Biochem Biophys 1997; 337: 115–20.
Cox JD, Stetz J, Pajak TF. Toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31: 1341–6.
Gaziyev AI. Low efficiency of repair of critical DNA damage caused by radiation in low doses. Rad Biol Radioecol 2011; 51: 512–29 (in Russian).
Vorobiova NYu, Antonenko AV, Osipov AN. Features of reaction of blood lymphocytes from breast cancer patients to irradiation in vitro. Rad Biol Radioecol 2011; 51: 451–6 (in Russian).
Gaillard H, García-Muse T, Aguilera A. Replication stress and cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2015; 15: 276–89.
Glavin OA, Domina EA, Mihailenko VM, et al. Metformin as a modifier of oxidative state of peripheral blood and the viability of human lymphocytes under the impact of ionizing radiation. Onkologiya 2020; 22: 84–91 (in Ukrainian).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Experimental Oncology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
