Studies on Response to the Challenging Dose of X-rays in Lymphocytes of Prostate Cancer Patients and Healthy Donor. M. Krzysiek 1 , A. Cebulska-Wasilewska 1,2 , A. Panek 1 , W. Lipczy ń ski 3 , M. Dobrowolska 3 , Z. Dobrowolski 3
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
M. Krzysiek 1, A. Cebulska-Wasilewska 1,2, A. Panek 1,
W. Lipczyński 3, M. Dobrowolska3, Z. Dobrowolski 3
1Department of Radiation and Environmental Biology, INP PAN, Radzikowskiego 152, 31-342 Kraków, Poland
2Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Kopernika 7, Collegium Medicum Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
3Department and Clinic of Urology CM UJ, Grzegórzecka 18, Kraków, Poland.
Aim of the study was to investigate variability beetwenprostate cancerpatients or benign prostate hyperplasia diseasepatients in a cellular response to the challenging dose of X-rays. The results were compared with the response of healthy donor’s cells.
It is a part of wider study which aim was to understand the mechanisms of cellular response that could help in deciding wheter prostate cancer patient should recieve radiotherapy or surgery.
DNA repair competence assay (fig.1):
The analysis of DNA in the comets were applied with the use of two parameters from the Komet 3.0 or Komet 5.5 software (Kinetic Imaging Company, Liverpool, UK):
Patient’s lymphocytes Lymphocytes of Prostate Cancer Patients and Healthy Donor
Internal standard lymphocytes
X-irradiation on ice, total dose 3Gy
Radiosensitivity was evaluated as follows:
ST-DNA = T-DNAx – T-DNA0
T-DNAx– measured after irradiation
T-DNA0 - measured without irradiation
Degree of DNA damage not repaired during the incubation (Residul Damage):
T-DNA40min – measured after 40 min incubation
Repair: 40 min, 37oC, medium: 80%RPMI,20%FCS
Figure 1. Sheme of repair competence assay
Results Lymphocytes of Prostate Cancer Patients and Healthy Donor
Table 1 The avarage levels of Radiosensitivity and Residual Damage evaluated for investigated groups of patients standardized with IS cells.
Significant (p<.05) increase in RDTM in cells of BPH patients and PC patients in comparison with Healthy Donor cells.
Significant increase in RDT-DNA in cells of BPH patients in comparision with PC patients
Significantly (p<.05) increased Radiosensitivity of lymphocytes collected from PC and BPH patients in comparison with IS cells
Table 2 The avarage levels of Radiosensitivity and Residual Damage evaluated for healthy person (IS)
Variability of c Lymphocytes of Prostate Cancer Patients and Healthy Donorelluar radiosensitivity
ST-DNA = 27.4
SD = 5.0
Figure 1 Celluar radiosensitivity of PC patients (ST-DNA) described as the dispersion from avarage of healthy donor cells.
In a group of PC patients the range of Radiosensitivity
(ST-DNA)was from 16.9 to 40.9, while from 18.7 to 36.9 in group of BPH patients
ST-DNA = 27.5
SD = 5.3
Figure 2 Celluar radiosensitivity of BPH patients (ST-DNA) described as the dispersion from avarage of helathy donor cells.
Variability of Residual Damage Lymphocytes of Prostate Cancer Patients and Healthy Donor
RDT-DNA = 55.1
SD = 16.9
Higher variability of RDin a group of PC patients than for BPH patients
Figure 3Residual damage (RDT-DNA) of PC patients evaluated as the dispersion from avarage of healthy donor cells.
In a group of PC patients the ratio between highiest and the lowest RDTM was 6.2.
In a group of BPH patients the ratio was 5.6
ST-DNA = 64.7
SD = 12.6
Figure 4Residual damage (RDT-DNA) of BPH patients evaluated as the dispersion from avarage of healthy donor cells.
It is hopefully possible to identify a subpopulations of patients whose cells are more radiosensitive or resistant or express higher or lower efficiency of DNA damage repair. In a consequence it might be useful information in a process of optimization and individualization of the therapy.