Loading…
γ-Radiation Sensitivity and Risk of Glioma
Background: About 9% of human cancers are brain tumors, of which 90% are gliomas. γ-Radiation has been identified as a risk factor for brain tumors. In a previous pilot study, we found that lymphocytes from patients with glioma were more sensitive to γ-radiation than were lymphocytes from matched co...
Saved in:
Published in: | JNCI : Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2001-10, Vol.93 (20), p.1553-1557 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Background: About 9% of human cancers are brain tumors, of which 90% are gliomas. γ-Radiation has been identified as a risk factor for brain tumors. In a previous pilot study, we found that lymphocytes from patients with glioma were more sensitive to γ-radiation than were lymphocytes from matched control subjects. In this larger case–control study, we compared the γ-radiation sensitivity of lymphocytes from glioma patients with those from control subjects and investigated the association between mutagen sensitivity and the risk for developing glioma. Methods: We used a mutagen sensitivity assay (an indirect measure of DNA repair activity) to assess chromosomal damage. We γ-irradiated (1.5 Gy) short-term lymphocyte cultures from 219 case patients with glioma and from 238 healthy control subjects frequency matched by age and sex. After irradiation, cells were cultured for 4 hours, and then Colcemid was added for 1 hour to arrest cells in mitosis. Fifty metaphases were randomly selected for each sample and scored for chromatid breaks. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: We observed a statistically significantly higher frequency of chromatid breaks per cell from case patients with glioma (mean = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.50 to 0.59) than from control subjects (mean = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.41 to 0.48) (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0027-8874 1460-2105 |
DOI: | 10.1093/jnci/93.20.1553 |