Radiation and Environmental Biophysics

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 53–70 | Cite as

Criteria and techniques for analysing cell survival data

  • D. Bettega
  • P. Calzolari
  • A. Ottolenghi
  • L. Tallone Lombardi
Article
Received:
Accepted:

Summary

Cell survival was studied by analyzing the inactivation probability density function and its fundamental parameters. Mean\(\bar D\), varianceσ2 and modeDmode were evaluated and a set of equations relating these parameters to the usual parameters of the multitarget, multihit and linear-quadratic modelsDo andn, α andβ, k andλ are reported. The multihit equation used was an extension of the usual equation, to allow parameterk to assume values that are not necessarily integers. In the multitarget curve, the mode of inactivation probability density function, proved to be the quasi-threshold doseDq =Do ln(n). Relative variance, degree of asymmetry and degree of peakedness can be calculated from the shape parametersn in the multitarget model,k in the multihit model, and\(\alpha /\sqrt \beta \) in the linear-quadratic model. From an analysis of eight published cell survival sets of data, on C3H10T1/2 cells exposed to low LET radiations, it was found that\(\bar D\),σ, andSF2 are the parameters which exhibit the least variation from experiment to experiment and the least variation in selecting the range of data available for estimation.

Keywords

Radiation Density Function Probability Density Cell Survival Probability Density Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alper T, Fowler JF, Morgan RL, Vonberg OO, Ellis F, Oliver R (1962) The characteristics of the “type C” survival curve. Br J Radiol 35:722–723Google Scholar
  2. Balcer-Kubiczeck EK, Harrison GH (1983) Oncogenic transformation of C3H10T1/2 by X-rays, fast-fission neutrons and cyclotron-produced neutrons. Int J Radiat Biol 44:377–388Google Scholar
  3. Bettega D, Tallone Lombardi L (1983) Physical and radiobiological parameters of proton beams up to 31 MeV. Nuovo Cimento 2D:907–916Google Scholar
  4. Bettega D, Calzolari P, Pollara P, Tallone Lombardi L (1985) In vitro cell transformations induced by 31 MeV protons. Radiat Res 104:178–181Google Scholar
  5. Deacon J, Peckham MJ, Steel GG (1984) The radioresponsiveness of human tumors an the initial slope of the cell survival curve. Radiother Oncol 2:317–323Google Scholar
  6. Elkind MM (1988) The initial part of the survival curve: does it predict the outcome of fractionated radiotherapy? Radiat Res 144:425–436Google Scholar
  7. Fertil B, Malaise EP (1981) Inherent cellular radiosensitivity as a basic concept for human tumor radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 7:621–629Google Scholar
  8. Fertil B, Malaise EP (1985) Intrinsic radiosensitivity of human cell lines is correlated with radioresponsiveness of human tumors: analysis of 101 published survival curves. Int J Radiat Biol Phys 11:1699–1707Google Scholar
  9. Fertil B, Dertinger H, Courdi A, Malaise EE (1984) Mean inactivation dose: a useful concept for intercomparison of human cell survival curves. Radiat Res 99:73–74Google Scholar
  10. Han A, Elkind MM (1979) Transformation of mouse C3H10T1/2 cells by single and fractional doses of X-rays and fission-spectrum neutrons. Cancer Res 39:123–130Google Scholar
  11. Han A, Hill CK, Elkind MM (1980) Repair of cell killing and neoplastic transformation at reduced dose rates of60Coγ rays. Cancer Res 40:3328–3332Google Scholar
  12. Hastings Jr C (1955) Approximation for digital computers. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  13. Hieber, L, Ponsel G, Roos H, Fenn S, Fromke E, Kellerer AM (1987) Absence of a dose-rate effect in the transformation of C3H10T1/2 cells byα-particles. Int J Radiat Biol 52:859–869Google Scholar
  14. ICRU (1979) Quantitative concepts and dosimetry in radiobiology. Report No 30. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. Kellerer AM, Hug O (1972) Theory of dose-effect relationships. In: Encyclopedia of medical radiobiology, vol 2. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 1–42Google Scholar
  16. Malaise EP, Fertil B, Chavaudra N, Guichard M (1986) Distribution of radiation sensitivities for human tumor cells of specific histological types: comparison of in vitro to in vivo data. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 12:617–624Google Scholar
  17. Miller RC, Hall EJ, Rossi HH (1979) Oncogenic transformation of mammalian cells in vitro with split doses of X-rays. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 76:5755–5758Google Scholar
  18. Roberts CJ, Goodhead DT (1987) The effect of238Puα-particles on the mouse fibroblast cell line C3H10T1/2: characterization of source and RBE for cell survival. Int J Radiat Biol 52:871–882Google Scholar
  19. Steel GG, McMillan TJ, Peacock JH (1989) The picture has changed in the 1980s. Int J Radiat Biol 56:525–537Google Scholar
  20. Terzaghi M and Little JB (1976) X-radiation-induced transformation in a C3H mouse embryo-derived cell line. Cancer Res 36:136–1374Google Scholar
  21. Tucker SL (1986) Is the mean inactivation dose a good measure of cell radiosensitivity? Radiat Res 105:18–26Google Scholar
  22. Weichselbaum RR, Rotmensch J, Ahmed-Swan S, Beckett MA (1989) Radiobiological characterization of 53 human tumor cell lines. Int J Radiat Biol 56:553–560Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Bettega
    • 1
  • P. Calzolari
    • 1
  • A. Ottolenghi
    • 1
  • L. Tallone Lombardi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Università di MilanoIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare - Sezione di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations