Measurement of oxidatively damaged DNA in mammalian cells using the comet assay: Reflections on validity, reliability and variability

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Dokumenter

  • Fulltext

    Forlagets udgivne version, 2,24 MB, PDF-dokument

The comet assay is a simple technique for measurements of low levels of DNA damage and repair in single cells. However, there is variation in background levels of DNA damage in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). This variation has been documented by inter-laboratory ring-trials where identical samples have been analysed in different laboratories using the formamidopyrimidine DNA glycosylase (Fpg)-modified comet assay. The coefficient of variation of background levels of Fpg-sensitive sites was 128 % in the first inter-laboratory validation trial called European Standards Committee on Oxidative DNA Damage. The variation was reduced to 44 % by the end of the project. Subsequent ring-trials by the European Comet Assay Validation Group showed similar inter-laboratory variation in Fpg-sensitive sites in PBMCs (45 %). The lowest inter-laboratory variation in Fpg-sensitive sites in PBMCs was 12 % when using calibration to standardize comet assay descriptors. Introduction of standard comet assay procedures was surprisingly unsuccessful as certain laboratories experienced technical problems using unaccustomed assay conditions. This problem was alleviated by using flexible assay standard conditions rather than a standard protocol in a ring-trial by the hCOMET group. The approach reduced technical problems, but the inter-laboratory variation in Fpg-sensitive sites was not reduced. The ring-trials have not pinpointed specific assay steps as major determinants of the variation in DNA damage levels. It is likely that small differences in several steps cause inter-laboratory variation. Although this variation in reported DNA damage levels causes concern, ring-trials have also shown that the comet assay is a reliable tool in biomonitoring studies.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer503423
TidsskriftMutation Research - Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis
Vol/bind873
ISSN1383-5718
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2022

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
I visited Andrew Collins? laboratory at the Rowett Research Institute in 1995 to learn the comet assay. Few researchers in Europe had been working with the comet assay in the early 1990s and it seemed prudent to combine science with a visit to the beautiful Scottish Highlands. Among several memorial moments was a field trip to Bennachie in rainy weather. Andrew has informed me that it is not a mountain because it is only 528 m above sea level (which of course is irrelevant to a person coming from a country without hills). We have worked together on several validation trials and initiatives to improve the comet assay as a technique for detection of DNA damage and repair. Sometimes it has been like a rainy day on Bennachie, but the company has been outstanding.

Funding Information:
At approximately the same time as the ECVAG and NewGeneris projects ended, Andrew Collins and other key researchers launched the ComNet project on the comet assay in human population studies [ 29 ]. Except for a review article on the comet assay as a tool in human biomonitoring studies [ 30 ], ComNet never gained momentum before it was superseded by the hCOMET project, funded by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action program. The name “hCOMET” refers to the use of the comet assay on samples from humans. However, hCOMET integrated all aspects of the comet assay in the same project. This is clearly illustrated by the title of two overview papers from hCOMET members: “The comet assay in animal models: From bugs to whales” [ 31 , 32 ].

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s)

Antal downloads er baseret på statistik fra Google Scholar og www.ku.dk


Ingen data tilgængelig

ID: 286988885