Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1667/RADE-22-00203.1
Title: RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2021: The FISH-Based Translocation Assay
Authors: J-F Barquinero
Y Abe
N Aneva
D Endesfelder
D Georgieva
Valerie Swee Ting Goh 
E Gregoire
R Hristova
Y Lee
J-S Martínez
P-K Meher
T Miura
M Port
M Pujol-Canadell
M J Prieto-Rodriguez
K-M Seong
Y Suto
K Takebayashi
N Tsuyama
A Wojcik
H-J Yoon
M Abend
Issue Date: 1-Jun-2023
Publisher: Radiation Research Society
Citation: J-F Barquinero, Y Abe, N Aneva, D Endesfelder, D Georgieva, Valerie Swee Ting Goh, E Gregoire, R Hristova, Y Lee, J-S Martínez, P-K Meher, T Miura, M Port, M Pujol-Canadell, M J Prieto-Rodriguez, K-M Seong, Y Suto, K Takebayashi, N Tsuyama, A Wojcik, H-J Yoon, M Abend (2023-06-01). RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2021: The FISH-Based Translocation Assay. Radiation Research 199 (6) : 583-590. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1667/RADE-22-00203.1
Abstract: Translocation analysis using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is the method of choice for dose assessment in case of chronic or past exposures to ionizing radiation. Although it is a widespread technique, unlike dicentrics, the number of FISH-based inter-laboratory comparisons is small. For this reason, although the current Running the European Network of Biological and Physical retrospective Dosimetry (RENEB) inter-laboratory comparison 2021 was designed as a fast response to a real emergency scenario, it was considered a good opportunity to perform an inter-laboratory comparison using the FISH technique to gain further experience. The Bundeswehr Institute of Radiobiology provided peripheral blood samples from one healthy human volunteer. Three test samples were irradiated with blinded doses of 0, 1.2, and 3.5 Gy, respectively. Samples were then sent to the seven participating laboratories. The FISH technique was applied according to the standard procedure of each laboratory. Both, the frequency of translocations and the estimated dose for each sample were sent to the coordinator using a special scoring sheet for FISH. All participants sent their results in due time. However, although it was initially requested to send the results based on the full analysis, evaluating 500 equivalent cells, most laboratories only sent the results based on triage, with a smaller number of analyzed cells. In the triage analysis, there was great heterogeneity in the number of equivalent cells scored. On the contrary, for the full analysis, this number was more homogeneous. For all three samples, one laboratory showed outlier yields compared to the other laboratories. Excluding these results, in the triage analysis, the frequency of translocations in sample no. 1 ranged from 0 to 0.013 translocations per cell, and for samples no. 2 and no. 3 the genomic mean frequency were 0.27 ± 0.03 and 1.47 ± 0.14, with a coefficient of variation of 0.29 and 0.23 respectively. Considering only results obtained in the triage analysis for sample no. 1, all laboratories, except one, classified this sample as the non-irradiated one. For sample no. 2, excluding the outlier value, the mean reported dose was 1.74 ± 0.16 Gy indicating a mean deviation of about 0.5 Gy to the delivered dose of 1.2 Gy. For sample no. 3 the mean dose estimated was 4.21 ± 0.21 Gy indicating a mean deviation of about 0.7 Gy to the delivered dose of 3.5 Gy. In the frame of RENEB, this is the second FISH-based inter-laboratory comparison. The whole exercise was planned as a response to an emergency, therefore, a triage analysis was requested for all the biomarkers except for FISH. Although a full analysis was initially requested for FISH, most of the laboratories reported only a triage-based result. The main reason is that it was not clearly stated what was required before starting the exercise. Results show that most of the laboratories successfully discriminated unexposed and irradiated samples from each other without any overlap. A good agreement in the observed frequencies of translocations was observed but there was a tendency to overestimate the delivered doses. Efforts to improve the harmonization of this technique and subsequent exercises to elucidate the reason for this trend should be promoted.
Source Title: Radiation Research
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/242063
ISSN: 1938-5404
0033-7587
DOI: 10.1667/RADE-22-00203.1
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.