RENEB biodosimetry intercomparison analyzing translocations by FISH

LBDNet interlaboratory comparison for the dicentric chromosome assay by digitized image analysis applying weighted robust statistical methods

PURPOSE

This interlaboratory comparison was conducted to evaluate the performance of the Latin-American Biodosimetry Network (LBDNet) in analyzing digitized images for scoring dicentric chromosomes from in vitro irradiated blood samples. The exercise also assessed the use of weighted robust algorithms to compensate the uneven expertise among the participating laboratories.

METHODS

Three sets of coded images obtained through the dicentric chromosome assay from blood samples irradiated at 1.5 Gy (sample A) and 4 Gy (sample B), as well as a non-irradiated whole blood sample (sample C), were shared among LBDNet laboratories. The images were captured using the Metafer4 platform coupled with the AutoCapt module. The laboratories were requested to perform triage scoring, conventional scoring, and dose estimation. The dose estimation was carried out using either their laboratory calibration curve or a common calibration curve. A comparative statistical analysis was conducted using a weighted robust Hampel algorithm and z score to compensate for uneven expertise in dicentric analysis and dose assessment among all laboratories.

RESULTS

Out of twelve laboratories, one had unsatisfactory estimated doses at 0 Gy, and two had unsatisfactory estimated doses at 1.5 Gy when using their own calibration curve and triage scoring mode. However, all doses were satisfactory at 4 Gy. Six laboratories had estimated doses within 95% uncertainty limits at 0 Gy, seven at 1.5 Gy, and four at 4 Gy. While the mean dose for sample C was significantly biased using robust algorithms, applying weights to compensate for the laboratory's analysis expertise reduced the bias by half. The bias from delivered doses was only notable for sample C. Using the common calibration curve for dose estimation reduced the standard deviation (s*) estimated by robust methods for all three samples.

CONCLUSIONS

The results underscore the significance of performing interlaboratory comparison exercises that involve digitized and electronically transmitted images, even when analyzing non-irradiated samples. In situations where the participating laboratories possess different levels of proficiency, it may prove essential to employ weighted robust algorithms to achieve precise outcomes.

Fluorescence in situ hybridisation for interphase chromosomal aberration-based biological dosimetry

Metaphase spreads stained with Giemsa or painted with chromosome-specific probes by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) have been in use since long for retrospective dose assessment (biological dosimetry). However, in cases of accidental exposure to ionising radiation, the culturing of lymphocytes to obtain metaphase chromosomes and analysis of chromosomal aberrations is time-consuming and problematic after high radiation doses. Similarly, analysing chromosomal damage in G0/G1 cells or nondividing cells by premature chromosome condensation is laborious. Following large-scale radiological emergencies, the time required for analysis is more important than precision of dose estimate. Painting of whole chromosomes using chromosome-specific probes in interphase nuclei by the FISH technique will eliminate the time required for cell culture and allow a fast dose estimate, provided that a meaningful dose-response can be obtained by scoring the number of chromosomal domains visible in interphase nuclei. In order to test the applicability of interphase FISH for quick biological dosimetry, whole blood from a healthy donor was irradiated with 8 Gy of gamma radiation. Irradiated whole blood was kept for 2 h at 37°C to allow DNA repair and thereafter processed for FISH with probes specific for Chromosomes-1 and 2. Damaged chromosomal fragments, distinguished by extra color domains, were observed in interphase nuclei of lymphocytes irradiated with 8 Gy. These fragments were efficiently detected and quantified by the FISH technique utilising both confocal and single plane fluorescence microscopy. Furthermore, a clear dose-response curve for interphase fragments was achieved following exposure to 0, 1, 2, 4 and 8 Gy of gamma radiation. These results demonstrate interphase FISH as a promising test for biodosimetry and for studying cytogenetic effects of radiation in nondividing cells.

RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2021: Inter-Assay Comparison of Eight Dosimetry Assays

Tools for radiation exposure reconstruction are required to support the medical management of radiation victims in radiological or nuclear incidents. Different biological and physical dosimetry assays can be used for various exposure scenarios to estimate the dose of ionizing radiation a person has absorbed. Regular validation of the techniques through inter-laboratory comparisons (ILC) is essential to guarantee high quality results. In the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison, the performance quality of established cytogenetic assays [dicentric chromosome assay (DCA), cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN), stable chromosomal translocation assay (FISH) and premature chromosome condensation assay (PCC)] was tested in comparison to molecular biological assays [gamma-H2AX foci (gH2AX), gene expression (GE)] and physical dosimetry-based assays [electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), optically or thermally stimulated luminescence (LUM)]. Three blinded coded samples (e.g., blood, enamel or mobiles) were exposed to 0, 1.2 or 3.5 Gy X-ray reference doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min). These doses roughly correspond to clinically relevant groups of unexposed to low exposed (0-1 Gy), moderately exposed (1-2 Gy, no severe acute health effects expected) and highly exposed individuals (>2 Gy, requiring early intensive medical care). In the frame of the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison, samples were sent to 86 specialized teams in 46 organizations from 27 nations for dose estimation and identification of three clinically relevant groups. The time for sending early crude reports and more precise reports was documented for each laboratory and assay where possible. The quality of dose estimates was analyzed with three different levels of granularity, 1. by calculating the frequency of correctly reported clinically relevant dose categories, 2. by determining the number of dose estimates within the uncertainty intervals recommended for triage dosimetry (±0.5 Gy or ±1.0 Gy for doses <2.5 Gy or >2.5 Gy), and 3. by calculating the absolute difference (AD) of estimated doses relative to the reference doses. In total, 554 dose estimates were submitted within the 6-week period given before the exercise was closed. For samples processed with the highest priority, earliest dose estimates/categories were reported within 5-10 h of receipt for GE, gH2AX, LUM, EPR, 2-3 days for DCA, CBMN and within 6-7 days for the FISH assay. For the unirradiated control sample, the categorization in the correct clinically relevant group (0-1 Gy) as well as the allocation to the triage uncertainty interval was, with the exception of a few outliers, successfully performed for all assays. For the 3.5 Gy sample the percentage of correct classifications to the clinically relevant group (≥2 Gy) was between 89-100% for all assays, with the exception of gH2AX. For the 1.2 Gy sample, an exact allocation to the clinically relevant group was more difficult and 0-50% or 0-48% of the estimates were wrongly classified into the lowest or highest dose categories, respectively. For the irradiated samples, the correct allocation to the triage uncertainty intervals varied considerably between assays for the 1.2 Gy (29-76%) and 3.5 Gy (17-100%) samples. While a systematic shift towards higher doses was observed for the cytogenetic-based assays, extreme outliers exceeding the reference doses 2-6 fold were observed for EPR, FISH and GE assays. These outliers were related to a particular material examined (tooth enamel for EPR assay, reported as kerma in enamel, but when converted into the proper quantity, i.e. to kerma in air, expected dose estimates could be recalculated in most cases), the level of experience of the teams (FISH) and methodological uncertainties (GE). This was the first RENEB ILC where everything, from blood sampling to irradiation and shipment of the samples, was organized and realized at the same institution, for several biological and physical retrospective dosimetry assays. Almost all assays appeared comparably applicable for the identification of unexposed and highly exposed individuals and the allocation of medical relevant groups, with the latter requiring medical support for the acute radiation scenario simulated in this exercise. However, extreme outliers or a systematic shift of dose estimates have been observed for some assays. Possible reasons will be discussed in the assay specific papers of this special issue. In summary, this ILC clearly demonstrates the need to conduct regular exercises to identify research needs, but also to identify technical problems and to optimize the design of future ILCs.

RENEB Inter-Laboratory Comparison 2021: The Gene Expression Assay

Early and high-throughput individual dose estimates are essential following large-scale radiation exposure events. In the context of the Running the European Network for Biodosimetry and Physical Dosimetry (RENEB) 2021 exercise, gene expression assays were conducted and their corresponding performance for dose-assessment is presented in this publication. Three blinded, coded whole blood samples from healthy donors were exposed to 0, 1.2 and 3.5 Gy X-ray doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) using the X-ray source Yxlon. These exposures correspond to clinically relevant groups of unexposed, low dose (no severe acute health effects expected) and high dose exposed individuals (requiring early intensive medical health care). Samples were sent to eight teams for dose estimation and identification of clinically relevant groups. For quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and microarray analyses, samples were lysed, stored at 20°C and shipped on wet ice. RNA isolations and assays were run in each laboratory according to locally established protocols. The time-to-result for both rough early and more precise later reports has been documented where possible. Accuracy of dose estimates was calculated as the difference between estimated and reference doses for all doses (summed absolute difference, SAD) and by determining the number of correctly reported dose estimates that were defined as ±0.5 Gy for reference doses <2.5 Gy and ±1.0 Gy for reference doses >3 Gy, as recommended for triage dosimetry. We also examined the allocation of dose estimates to clinically/diagnostically relevant exposure groups. Altogether, 105 dose estimates were reported by the eight teams, and the earliest report times on dose categories and estimates were 5 h and 9 h, respectively. The coefficient of variation for 85% of all 436 qRT-PCR measurements did not exceed 10%. One team reported dose estimates that systematically deviated several-fold from reported dose estimates, and these outliers were excluded from further analysis. Teams employing a combination of several genes generated about two-times lower median SADs (0.8 Gy) compared to dose estimates based on single genes only (1.7 Gy). When considering the uncertainty intervals for triage dosimetry, dose estimates of all teams together were correctly reported in 100% of the 0 Gy, 50% of the 1.2 Gy and 50% of the 3.5 Gy exposed samples. The order of dose estimates (from lowest to highest) corresponding to three dose categories (unexposed, low dose and highest exposure) were correctly reported by all teams and all chosen genes or gene combinations. Furthermore, if teams reported no exposure or an exposure >3.5 Gy, it was always correctly allocated to the unexposed and the highly exposed group, while low exposed (1.2 Gy) samples sometimes could not be discriminated from highly (3.5 Gy) exposed samples. All teams used FDXR and 78.1% of correct dose estimates used FDXR as one of the predictors. Still, the accuracy of reported dose estimates based on FDXR differed considerably among teams with one team's SAD (0.5 Gy) being comparable to the dose accuracy employing a combination of genes. Using the workflow of this reference team, we performed additional experiments after the exercise on residual RNA and cDNA sent by six teams to the reference team. All samples were processed similarly with the intention to improve the accuracy of dose estimates when employing the same workflow. Re-evaluated dose estimates improved for half of the samples and worsened for the others. In conclusion, this inter-laboratory comparison exercise enabled (1) identification of technical problems and corrections in preparations for future events, (2) confirmed the early and high-throughput capabilities of gene expression, (3) emphasized different biodosimetry approaches using either only FDXR or a gene combination, (4) indicated some improvements in dose estimation with FDXR when employing a similar methodology, which requires further research for the final conclusion and (5) underlined the applicability of gene expression for identification of unexposed and highly exposed samples, supporting medical management in radiological or nuclear scenarios.

Protocol for one-step selective lysis of red blood cells and platelets with long-term preservation of white blood cells (human) at ambient temperature

Current protocols for storage of white blood cells (WBCs) rely on constant refrigeration. The protocol described below explains the preparation of a fixative combination saline (FCS) formulation, which allows fixation of human WBCs and lysis of red blood cells and platelets (at ambient temperature, 4–35^oC) in whole blood samples in one step. FCS can be used for storing and transporting blood at ambient temperatures for up to 4 months, without altering the nuclear morphology and genomic integrity of WBCs.

•

FCS for single-step preparation of human WBCs

•

FCS fixes and preserves WBCs; FCS selectively lyses RBCs and platelets

•

Fixed WBCs can be stored and transported at ambient temperature up to 4 months

•

FCS can overcome the constraint of refrigeration of blood samples

The future of biological dosimetry in mass casualty radiation emergency response, personalized radiation risk estimation and space radiation protection

PURPOSE

The aim of this brief personal, high level review is to consider the state of the art for biological dosimetry for radiation routine and emergency response, and the potential future progress in this fascinating and active field. Four areas in which biomarkers may contribute to scientific advancement through improved dose and exposure characterization, as well as potential contributions to personalized risk estimation, are considered: emergency dosimetry, molecular epidemiology, personalized medical dosimetry, and space travel.

CONCLUSION

Ionizing radiation biodosimetry is an exciting field which will continue to benefit from active networking and collaboration with the wider fields of radiation research and radiation emergency response to ensure effective, joined up approaches to triage; radiation epidemiology to assess long term, low dose, radiation risk; radiation protection of workers, optimization and justification of radiation for diagnosis or treatment of patients in clinical uses, and protection of individuals traveling to space.

Retrospective biodosimetry techniques: Focus on cytogenetics assays for individuals exposed to ionizing radiation

In the absence of physical data, biodosimetry tools are required for fast dose and risk assessment in the event of radiological or nuclear mass accidents or attacks to triage exposed humans and take immediate medical countermeasures. Biodosimetry tools have mostly been developed for retrospective dose assessment and the follow-up of victims of irradiation. Among them, cytogenetics analyses, to reveal chromosome damage, are the most developed and allow the determination of doses from blood samples as low as 100 mGy. Various cytogenetic tests have already allowed retrospective dose assessment of Chernobyl liquidators and military personnel exposed to nuclear tests after decades. In this review, we discuss the properties of various biodosimetry techniques, such as their sensitivity and limitations as a function of the time from exposure, using multiple examples of nuclear catastrophes or working exposure. Among them, chromosome FISH hybridization, which reveals chromosome translocations, is the most reliable due to the persistence of translocations for decades, whereas dicentric chromosome and micronuclei assays allow rapid and accurate dose assessment a short time after exposure. Both need to be adjusted through mathematical algorithms for retrospective analyses, accounting for the time since exposure and the victims' age. The goal for the future will be to better model chromosome damage, reduce the time to result, and develop new complementary biodosimetry approaches, such as mutation signatures.

A High Throughput Approach to Reconstruct Partial-Body and Neutron Radiation Exposures on an Individual Basis

Biodosimetry-based individualized reconstruction of complex irradiation scenarios (partial-body shielding and/or neutron + photon mixtures) can improve treatment decisions after mass-casualty radiation-related incidents. We used a high-throughput micronucleus assay with automated scanning and imaging software on ex-vivo irradiated human lymphocytes to: a) reconstruct partial-body and/or neutron exposure, and b) estimate separately the photon and neutron doses in a mixed exposure. The mechanistic background is that, compared with total-body photon irradiations, neutrons produce more heavily-damaged lymphocytes with multiple micronuclei/binucleated cell, whereas partial-body exposures produce fewer such lymphocytes. To utilize these differences for biodosimetry, we developed metrics that describe micronuclei distributions in binucleated cells and serve as predictors in machine learning or parametric analyses of the following scenarios: (A) Homogeneous gamma-irradiation, mimicking total-body exposures, vs. mixtures of irradiated blood with unirradiated blood, mimicking partial-body exposures. (B) X rays vs. various neutron + photon mixtures. The results showed high accuracies of scenario and dose reconstructions. Specifically, receiver operating characteristic curve areas (AUC) for sample classification by exposure type reached 0.931 and 0.916 in scenarios A and B, respectively. R² for actual vs. reconstructed doses in these scenarios reached 0.87 and 0.77, respectively. These encouraging findings demonstrate a proof-of-principle for the proposed approach of high-throughput reconstruction of clinically-relevant complex radiation exposure scenarios.

Mitochondrial DNA damage in the hair bulb: can it be used as a noninvasive biomarker of local exposure to low LET ionizing radiation?

Purpose: Our aim was to evaluate whether mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) damage in hair bulbs could be a suitable biomarker for the detection of local exposure to ionizing radiation.Materials and methods: Mouse hair was collected 4 and 24 hours, 3 and 10 days after single whole-body exposure to 0, 0.1, and 2 Gy radiation. Pubic hair (treated area) and scalp hair (control area) were collected from 13 prostate cancer patients before and after fractioned radiotherapy with an average total dose of 2.7 Gy to follicles after five fractions. Unspecified lesion frequency of mtDNA was analyzed with long PCR, large mtDNA deletion levels were tested with real-time PCR.Results: Unspecified lesion frequency of mtDNA significantly increased in mouse hair 24 hours after irradiation with 2 Gy, but variance among samples was high. No increase in lesion frequency could be detected after 0.1 Gy irradiation. In prostate cancer patients, there was no significant change in either the unspecified lesion frequency or in the proportion of 4934-bp deleted mtDNA in pubic hair after radiotherapy. The proportions of murine 3860-bp common deletion, human 4977-bp common deletion and 7455-bp deleted mtDNA were too low to be analyzed reliably.Conclusions: Our results suggest that the unspecified lesion frequency and proportion of large deletions of mtDNA in hair bulbs are not suitable biomarkers of exposure to ionizing radiation.

UNCERTAINTY ON RADIATION DOSES ESTIMATED BY BIOLOGICAL AND RETROSPECTIVE PHYSICAL METHODS

Biological and physical retrospective dosimetry are recognised as key techniques to provide individual estimates of dose following unplanned exposures to ionising radiation. Whilst there has been a relatively large amount of recent development in the biological and physical procedures, development of statistical analysis techniques has failed to keep pace. The aim of this paper is to review the current state of the art in uncertainty analysis techniques across the 'EURADOS Working Group 10-Retrospective dosimetry' members, to give concrete examples of implementation of the techniques recommended in the international standards, and to further promote the use of Monte Carlo techniques to support characterisation of uncertainties. It is concluded that sufficient techniques are available and in use by most laboratories for acute, whole body exposures to highly penetrating radiation, but further work will be required to ensure that statistical analysis is always wholly sufficient for the more complex exposure scenarios.

RENEB accident simulation exercise

PURPOSE

The RENEB accident exercise was carried out in order to train the RENEB participants in coordinating and managing potentially large data sets that would be generated in case of a major radiological event.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Each participant was offered the possibility to activate the network by sending an alerting email about a simulated radiation emergency. The same participant had to collect, compile and report capacity, triage categorization and exposure scenario results obtained from all other participants. The exercise was performed over 27 weeks and involved the network consisting of 28 institutes: 21 RENEB members, four candidates and three non-RENEB partners.

RESULTS

The duration of a single exercise never exceeded 10 days, while the response from the assisting laboratories never came later than within half a day. During each week of the exercise, around 4500 samples were reported by all service laboratories (SL) to be examined and 54 scenarios were coherently estimated by all laboratories (the standard deviation from the mean of all SL answers for a given scenario category and a set of data was not larger than 3 patient codes).

CONCLUSIONS

Each participant received training in both the role of a reference laboratory (activating the network) and of a service laboratory (responding to an activation request). The procedures in the case of radiological event were successfully established and tested.