Environmental Health Perspectives 105, Supplement 6, December 1997

[ Citation in PubMed ] [ Related Articles ]

Is FISH Painting an Appropriate Biological Marker for Dose Estimates of Suspected Accidental Radiation Overexposure? A Review of Cases Investigated in France from 1995 to 1996

Irène Sorokine-Durm, Valérie Durand, Annie Le Roy, Nathalie Paillole, Laurence Roy, and Philippe Voisin

Institut de Protection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, Département de Protection de la Santé de L'Homme et de Dosimétrie, IPSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses cedex, France

Abstract
From 1995 to 1996 about 15 people suspected of being overexposed to ionizing radiation were referred to the Institute for Nuclear Safety and Protection in Fontenay-aux-Roses, France, for investigation by chromosome aberration analysis. Biological estimates of accidental overexposure were first obtained by scoring radio-induced unstable structural chromosome aberrations (dicentrics, centric rings, and fragments) in peripheral blood lymphocytes. For dose estimates, the yield of these chromosomal aberrations observed in 500 metaphases was compared with the laboratory dose-response relationship established from human blood irradiated in vitro (gamma-rays, 60Co, 0.5 Gy/min). To extend the possibilities of detecting DNA damage from earlier exposures by visualizing stable chromosome aberrations, chromosome painting by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH painting) was developed using a cocktail of three composite whole human chromosome-specific DNA probes (numbers 2, 4, and 12). A laboratory calibration curve for scoring terminal and/or reciprocal translocations was established for the same radiation quality and dose rate as those used for conventional cytogenetics (gamma-rays, 60Co, 0.5 Gy/min). For dosimetry purposes, it was also important to verify whether FISH painting could be applied to each human blood sample assessed for conventional expertise. For each individual, 2000 metaphases were scored for the presence or absence of reciprocal and terminal translocations. We present here a comparison between the results obtained by the two technologies for each of the cases studied separately. We describe their similarities or differences and discuss the suitability of using FISH painting for routine expertise analysis. -- Environ Health Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1427-1432 (1997)

Key words: suspected radiation overexposure, chromosomal aberrations, dosimetry, conventional cytogenetics, FISH painting

This paper is based on a presentation at the International Conference on Radiation and Health held 3-7 November 1996 in Beer Sheva, Israel. Abstracts of these papers were previously published in Public Health Reviews 24(3-4):205-431 (1996). Manuscript received at EHP 7 April 1997; accepted 17 July 1997.

Address correspondence to Dr I. Sorokine-Durm, Institut de Protection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, Département de Protection de la santé de l'Homme et de Dosimétrie, Section Autonome de Radiobiologie Appliquée à la Médecine, IPSN, B.P. 6, F-92265, Fontenay-aux-Roses cedex, France. Telephone: 33 1 46 54 95 47. Fax: 33 46 54 84 67. E-mail: irene.sorokine@ipsn.fr

Abbreviations used: BrdU, 5-bromodeoxyuridine, thymidine analogue; DAPI, 4',6-diamidine-2'-phenylindole dihydrochloride; Dic, dicentric; EC, cells containing visible complex exchange; FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization; FITC, fluorescein isothiocyanate; FPG, fluorescence plus Giemsa technique; Gy, gray; Ins, insertion; IPSN, Institute for Nuclear Safety and Protection; RX, X-rays; 2MultipleSSC, saline-sodium citrate buffer concentrated 2-fold; TR, reciprocal translocation; TT, terminal translocation; (TR + TT) eq, genomic estimated translocations.

[Table of Contents] [Full Article] [ Citation in PubMed ] [ Related Articles ]

Last Update: February 9, 1998