Beinke C, Port M, Riecke A, Ruf C G, Abend M
a Bundeswehr Institute of Radiobiology, 80937 Munich, Germany;
b Department of Hematology, Federal Armed Forces Hospital, 89081 Ulm, Germany; and.
Radiat Res. 2016 May;185(5):461-72. doi: 10.1667/RR14294.1. Epub 2016 Apr 19.
The purpose of this work was to adapt a more advanced form of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) cytome assay for triage biodosimetry in the event of a mass casualty radiation incident. We modified scoring procedures for the CBMN cytome assay to optimize field deployability, dose range, accuracy, speed, economy, simplicity and stability. Peripheral blood of 20 donors was irradiated in vitro (0-6 Gy X ray, maximum photon energy 240 keV) and processed for CBMN. Initially, we assessed two manual scoring strategies for accuracy: 1. Conventional scoring, comprised of micronucleus (MN) frequency per 1,000 binucleated (BN) cells (MN/1,000 BN cells); and 2. Evaluation of 1,000, 2,000 and 3,000 cells in total and different cellular subsets based on MN formation and proliferation (e.g., BN cells with and without MN, mononucleated cells). We used linear and logistic regression models to identify the cellular subsets related closest to dose with the best discrimination ability among different doses/dose categories. We validated the most promising subsets and their combinations with 16 blind samples covering a dose range of 0-8.3 Gy. Linear dose-response relationships comparable to the conventional CBMN assay (r(2) = 0.86) were found for BN cells with MN (r(2) = 0.84) and BN cells without MN (r(2) = 0.84). Models of combined cell counts (CCC) of BN cells with and without MN (BN(+MN) and BN(-MN)) with mononucleated cells (Mono) improved this relationship (r(2) = 0.92). Conventional CBMN discriminated dose categories up to 3 Gy with a concordance between 0.96-1.0 upon scoring 1,000 total cells. In 1,000 BN cells, concordances were observed for conventional CBMN up to 4 Gy as well as BN(+MN) or BN(-MN) (about 0.85). At doses of 4-6 Gy, the concordance of conventional CBMN, BN(+MN) and BN(-MN) declined (about 0.55). We found about 20% higher concordance and more precise dose estimates of irradiated and blinded samples for CCC (Mono + BN(+MN)) after scoring 1,000 total cells. Blinded sample analysis revealed that the mean absolute difference (MAD) of dose estimates and the number of dose estimates outside the ±0.5 Gy interval based on CCC (Mono + BN(+MN)) was comparable to conventional CBMN for doses ≤4 Gy when scoring 3,000 total cells or more. At doses >4-8.3 Gy, the MAD of CCC (Mono + BN(+MN)) declined to half of the MADs observed for conventional CBMN, suggesting that the combined cell counts approach improved the discrimination ability. Conventional CBMN at 1,000 total-cell counts performed as efficiently as counting 1,000 BN cells. Discriminating and counting only BN cells with and without MN after 1,000 BN cells at ≤4 Gy revealed performances similar to conventional CBMN. After 3,000 total cells were scored, CCC (Mono + BN(+MN)) was superior to conventional CBMN at >4 Gy up to about 8 Gy. Our modification of CBMN evaluations saved time compared to the widely established semiautomated MN scoring and extended the dose range up to approximately 6 Gy for triage biodosimetry.
这项工作的目的是采用一种更先进的胞质分裂阻滞微核(CBMN)细胞分析法,用于在大规模伤亡辐射事件中进行分流生物剂量测定。我们修改了CBMN细胞分析法的评分程序,以优化现场可部署性、剂量范围、准确性、速度、经济性、简易性和稳定性。对20名供体的外周血进行体外照射(0 - 6 Gy X射线,最大光子能量240 keV),并进行CBMN检测。最初,我们评估了两种手动评分策略的准确性:1. 传统评分,即每1000个双核(BN)细胞中的微核(MN)频率(MN/1000 BN细胞);2. 根据MN形成和增殖情况,对总共1000、2000和3000个细胞以及不同细胞亚群进行评估(例如,有和没有MN的BN细胞、单核细胞)。我们使用线性和逻辑回归模型来确定在不同剂量/剂量类别中与剂量最相关且具有最佳区分能力的细胞亚群。我们用16个覆盖0 - 8.3 Gy剂量范围的盲样对最有前景的亚群及其组合进行了验证。发现有MN的BN细胞(r² = 0.84)和无MN的BN细胞(r² = 0.84)与传统CBMN检测具有可比的线性剂量反应关系(r² = 0.86)。有和无MN的BN细胞(BN(+MN)和BN(-MN))与单核细胞(Mono)的组合细胞计数(CCC)模型改善了这种关系(r² = 0.92)。当对总共1000个细胞进行评分时,传统CBMN能够区分高达3 Gy的剂量类别,一致性在0.96 - 1.0之间。在1000个BN细胞中,传统CBMN在高达4 Gy时以及BN(+MN)或BN(-MN)(约0.85)都观察到了一致性。在4 - 6 Gy剂量下,传统CBMN、BN(+MN)和BN(-MN)的一致性下降(约0.55)。我们发现,在对总共1000个细胞进行评分后,CCC(Mono + BN(+MN))对受辐照和盲样的一致性提高了约20%,剂量估计更精确。盲样分析表明,基于CCC(Mono + BN(+MN))的剂量估计的平均绝对差(MAD)以及±0.5 Gy区间外的剂量估计数量,在对总共3000个或更多细胞进行评分时,对于≤4 Gy的剂量与传统CBMN相当。在剂量>4 - 8.3 Gy时,CCC(Mono + BN(+MN))的MAD降至传统CBMN观察值的一半,这表明组合细胞计数方法提高了区分能力。对总共1000个细胞进行计数时,传统CBMN的效率与计数1000个BN细胞相同。在≤4 Gy时,在1000个BN细胞后仅区分有和无MN的BN细胞,其性能与传统CBMN相似。在对总共3000个细胞进行评分后,在>4 Gy至约8 Gy时,CCC(Mono + BN(+MN))优于传统CBMN。与广泛使用的半自动MN评分相比,我们对CBMN评估的修改节省了时间,并将分流生物剂量测定的剂量范围扩展到了约6 Gy。