Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

DNA damage in lymphocytes induced by cardiac CT and comparison with physical exposure parameters

  • Computed Tomography
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate whether physical exposure parameters such as the dose index (CTDI), dose length product (DLP), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) are predictive of DNA damage.

Methods

In vitro, we scanned a phantom containing blood samples from five volunteers at CTDI 50, 100, and 150 mGy. One sample was not scanned. We also scanned samples in three different-size phantoms at CTDI 100 mGy. In vivo, we enrolled 45 patients and obtained blood samples before and after cardiac CT. The γ-H2AX foci were counted.

Results

In vitro, in the control and at CTDI 50, 100, and 150 mGy, the number of γ-H2AX was 0.94 ± 0.24 (standard error, SE), 1.28 ± 0.30, 1.91 ± 0.47, and 2.16 ± 0.20. At SSDE 180, 156, and 135 mGy, it was 2.41 ± 0.20, 1.91 ± 0.47, and 1.42 ± 0.20 foci/cell. The γ-H2AX foci were positively correlated with the radiation dose and negatively correlated with the body size. In vivo, the γ-H2AX foci were significantly increased after CT (from 1.21 ± 0.19 to 1.92 ± 0.22 foci/cell) and correlated with CTDI, DLP, and SSDE.

Conclusions

DNA damage was induced by cardiac CT. There was a correlation between the physical exposure parameters and γ-H2AX.

Key Points

• DNA damage was induced by radiation exposure from cardiac CT.

• The γ-H2AX foci number was correlated with the CT radiation dose.

• Physical exposure parameters reflect the DNA damage by CT radiation exposure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CTDI:

CT dose index

DLP:

Dose length product

SSDE:

Size-specific dose estimates

References

  1. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD (2004) Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 232:735–738

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brix G, Lechel U, Nekolla E, Griebel J, Becker C (2014) Radiation protection issues in dynamic contrast-enhanced (perfusion) computed tomography. Eur J Radiol. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.11.011

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hochberg AR, Young GS (2012) Cerebral perfusion imaging. Semin Neurol 32:454–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Goldstein JA (2005) Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:552–557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography−an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357:2277–2284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S (2004) Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 363:345–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rothkamm K, Balroop S, Shekhdar J, Fernie P, Goh V (2007) Leukocyte DNA damage after multi-detector row CT: a quantitative biomarker of low-level radiation exposure. Radiology 242:244–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Salibi PN, Agarwal V, Panczykowski DM, Puccio AM, Sheetz MA, Okonkwo DO (2014) Lifetime attributable risk of cancer from CT among patients surviving severe traumatic brain injury. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:397–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shah KH, Slovis BH, Runde D, Godbout B, Newman DH, Lee J (2013) Radiation exposure among patients with the highest CT scan utilization in the emergency department. Emerg Radiol 20:485–491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wen JC, Sai V, Straatsma BR, McCannel TA (2013) Radiation-related cancer risk associated with radiographic imaging−reply. JAMA Ophthalmol 131:1249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP et al (2009) Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology 251:175–184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Cody DD, Boone JM, McNitt-Gray MF (2011) CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiology 259:311–316

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Brady SL, Kaufman RA (2012) Investigation of American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 204 size-specific dose estimates for pediatric CT implementation. Radiology 265:832–840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Christner JA, Braun NN, Jacobsen MC, Carter RE, Kofler JM, McCollough CH (2012) Size-specific dose estimates for adult patients at CT of the torso. Radiology 265:841–847

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rogakou EP, Boon C, Redon C, Bonner WM (1999) Megabase chromatin domains involved in DNA double-strand breaks in vivo. J Cell Biol 146:905–916

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Rogakou EP, Pilch DR, Orr AH, Ivanova VS, Bonner WM (1998) DNA double-stranded breaks induce histone H2AX phosphorylation on serine 139. J Biol Chem 273:5858–5868

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jackson SP (2002) Sensing and repairing DNA double-strand breaks. Carcinogenesis 23:687–696

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ishida M, Ishida T, Tashiro S et al (2014) Smoking cessation reverses DNA double-strand breaks in human mononuclear cells. PLoS One 9, e103993

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Li B, Behrman RH (2012) Comment on the “report of AAPM TG 204: size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations” [report of AAPM TG 204, 2011]. Med Phys 39:4613–4614, author reply 4615-4616

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Piechowiak EI, Peter JF, Kleb B, Klose KJ, Heverhagen JT (2015) Intravenous iodinated contrast agents amplify DNA radiation damage at CT. Radiology 275:692–697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pathe C, Eble K, Schmitz-Beuting D et al (2011) The presence of iodinated contrast agents amplifies DNA radiation damage in computed tomography. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 6:507–513

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Angele S, Romestaing P, Moullan N et al (2003) ATM haplotypes and cellular response to DNA damage: association with breast cancer risk and clinical radiosensitivity. Cancer Res 63:8717–8725

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang L, Yang M, Bi N et al (2010) Association of TGF-beta1 and XPD polymorphisms with severe acute radiation-induced esophageal toxicity in locally advanced lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 97:19–25

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ismail IH, Wadhra TI, Hammarsten O (2007) An optimized method for detecting gamma-H2AX in blood cells reveals a significant interindividual variation in the gamma-H2AX response among humans. Nucleic Acids Res 35, e36

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Andrievski A, Wilkins RC (2009) The response of gamma-H2AX in human lymphocytes and lymphocytes subsets measured in whole blood cultures. Int J Radiat Biol 85:369–376

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Shrivastav M, De Haro LP, Nickoloff JA (2008) Regulation of DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice. Cell Res 18:134–147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT et al (2003) Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:13761–13766

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Halm BM, Franke AA, Lai JF et al (2014) gamma-H2AX foci are increased in lymphocytes in vivo in young children 1 h after very low-dose X-irradiation: a pilot study. Pediatr Radiol 44:1310–1317

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lobrich M, Rief N, Kuhne M et al (2005) In vivo formation and repair of DNA double-strand breaks after computed tomography examinations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:8984–8989

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Beels L, Bacher K, Smeets P, Verstraete K, Vral A, Thierens H (2012) Dose-length product of scanners correlates with DNA damage in patients undergoing contrast CT. Eur J Radiol 81:1495–1499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brand M, Sommer M, Achenbach S et al (2012) X-ray induced DNA double-strand breaks in coronary CT angiography: comparison of sequential, low-pitch helical and high-pitch helical data acquisition. Eur J Radiol 81:e357–e362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vandevoorde C, Franck C, Bacher K et al (2015) Gamma-H2AX foci as in vivo effect biomarker in children emphasize the importance to minimize x-ray doses in paediatric CT imaging. Eur Radiol 25:800–811

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gould R, McFadden SL, Horn S, Prise KM, Doyle P, Hughes CM (2016) Assessment of DNA double-strand breaks induced by intravascular iodinated contrast media following in vitro irradiation and in vivo, during paediatric cardiac catheterization. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 11:122–129

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Geisel D, Zimmermann E, Rief M et al (2012) DNA double-strand breaks as potential indicators for the biological effects of ionising radiation exposure from cardiac CT and conventional coronary angiography: a randomised, controlled study. Eur Radiol 22:1641–1650

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Beels L, Bacher K, De Wolf D, Werbrouck J, Thierens H (2009) gamma-H2AX foci as a biomarker for patient X-ray exposure in pediatric cardiac catheterization: are we underestimating radiation risks? Circulation 120:1903–1909

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kato S, Yoshimura K, Kimata T, Mine K, Uchiyama T, Kaneko K (2015) Urinary 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine: a biomarker for radiation-induced oxidative DNA Damage in pediatric cardiac catheterization. J Pediatr 167(1369-1374), e1361

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kubo T, Ohno Y, Kauczor HU, Hatabu H (2014) Radiation dose reduction in chest CT--review of available options. Eur J Radiol 83:1953–1961

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lee SW, Kim Y, Shim SS et al (2014) Image quality assessment of ultra low-dose chest CT using sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction. Eur Radiol 24:817–826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Gabusi M, Riccardi L, Aliberti C, Vio S, Paiusco M (2016) Radiation dose in chest CT: assessment of size-specific dose estimates based on water-equivalent correction. Phys Med 32:393–397

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Kazuo Awai, MD, PhD. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. This study has received funding by JSPS KAKENHI grant no. 25461825. One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study. Methodology: prospective/prospective, experimental, performed at one institution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Institute of Biomedical Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minamiku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan

    Wataru Fukumoto, Fuminari Tatsugami & Kazuo Awai

  2. Department of Cardiovascular Physiology and Medicine, Institute of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

    Mari Ishida & Chiemi Sakai

  3. Department of Cellular Biology, Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

    Satoshi Tashiro

  4. Institute of Clinical Research West Medical Center, Hiroshima, Japan

    Takafumi Ishida

  5. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hiroshima University Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan

    Yukiko Nakano

Authors
  1. Wataru Fukumoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mari Ishida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chiemi Sakai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Satoshi Tashiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Takafumi Ishida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yukiko Nakano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Fuminari Tatsugami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kazuo Awai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wataru Fukumoto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fukumoto, W., Ishida, M., Sakai, C. et al. DNA damage in lymphocytes induced by cardiac CT and comparison with physical exposure parameters. Eur Radiol 27, 1660–1666 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4519-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4519-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation