PortalPublikationenLaboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronuc...

Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay

Standard

Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay. / Romm, H; Barnard, S; Boulay-Greene, H; De Amicis, A; De Sanctis, S; Franco, M; Herodin, F; Jones, A; Kulka, U; Lista, F; Martigne, P; Moquet, J; Oestreicher, U; Rothkamm, K; Thierens, H; Valente, M; Vandersickel, V; Vral, A; Braselmann, H; Meineke, V; Abend, M; Beinke, C.

in: RADIAT RES, Jahrgang 180, Nr. 2, 08.2013, S. 120-8.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung

Harvard

Romm, H, Barnard, S, Boulay-Greene, H, De Amicis, A, De Sanctis, S, Franco, M, Herodin, F, Jones, A, Kulka, U, Lista, F, Martigne, P, Moquet, J, Oestreicher, U, Rothkamm, K, Thierens, H, Valente, M, Vandersickel, V, Vral, A, Braselmann, H, Meineke, V, Abend, M & Beinke, C 2013, 'Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay', RADIAT RES, Jg. 180, Nr. 2, S. 120-8. https://doi.org/10.1667/RR3234.1

APA

Romm, H., Barnard, S., Boulay-Greene, H., De Amicis, A., De Sanctis, S., Franco, M., Herodin, F., Jones, A., Kulka, U., Lista, F., Martigne, P., Moquet, J., Oestreicher, U., Rothkamm, K., Thierens, H., Valente, M., Vandersickel, V., Vral, A., Braselmann, H., ... Beinke, C. (2013). Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay. RADIAT RES, 180(2), 120-8. https://doi.org/10.1667/RR3234.1

Vancouver

Romm H, Barnard S, Boulay-Greene H, De Amicis A, De Sanctis S, Franco M et al. Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay. RADIAT RES. 2013 Aug;180(2):120-8. https://doi.org/10.1667/RR3234.1

Bibtex

@article{5fd066c0cdc2411ea46f7eb25a154ed7,
title = "Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay",
abstract = "The focus of the study is an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25-5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. The CBMN assay was performed according to protocols individually established and varying among participating laboratories. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 4 days after sample arrival. The CBMN dose estimates were reported with high accuracy (MAD values of 0.20-0.50 Gy at doses below 6.4 Gy for both manual and automated scoring procedures), but showed a limitation of the assay at the dose point of 6.4 Gy, which resulted in a clear dose underestimation in all cases. The MAD values (without 6.4 Gy) differed significantly (P = 0.03) between manual (0.25 Gy, SEM = 0.06, n = 4) or automated scoring procedures (0.37 Gy, SEM = 0.08, n = 5), but lowest MAD were equal (0.2 Gy) for both scoring procedures. Likewise, both scoring procedures led to the same allocation of dose estimates to triage categories of clinical significance (about 83% accuracy and up to 100% specificity). ",
keywords = "Adult, Automation, Biological Assay/methods, Cells, Cultured/radiation effects, Cytokinesis/radiation effects, Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation, Humans, Laboratory Proficiency Testing, Leukocytes/radiation effects, Male, Micronucleus Tests/methods, Radiation Injuries/diagnosis, Radioactive Hazard Release, Radiometry/methods, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, Single-Blind Method, Time Factors, Triage/methods",
author = "H Romm and S Barnard and H Boulay-Greene and {De Amicis}, A and {De Sanctis}, S and M Franco and F Herodin and A Jones and U Kulka and F Lista and P Martigne and J Moquet and U Oestreicher and K Rothkamm and H Thierens and M Valente and V Vandersickel and A Vral and H Braselmann and V Meineke and M Abend and C Beinke",
year = "2013",
month = aug,
doi = "10.1667/RR3234.1",
language = "English",
volume = "180",
pages = "120--8",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay

AU - Romm, H

AU - Barnard, S

AU - Boulay-Greene, H

AU - De Amicis, A

AU - De Sanctis, S

AU - Franco, M

AU - Herodin, F

AU - Jones, A

AU - Kulka, U

AU - Lista, F

AU - Martigne, P

AU - Moquet, J

AU - Oestreicher, U

AU - Rothkamm, K

AU - Thierens, H

AU - Valente, M

AU - Vandersickel, V

AU - Vral, A

AU - Braselmann, H

AU - Meineke, V

AU - Abend, M

AU - Beinke, C

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - The focus of the study is an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25-5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. The CBMN assay was performed according to protocols individually established and varying among participating laboratories. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 4 days after sample arrival. The CBMN dose estimates were reported with high accuracy (MAD values of 0.20-0.50 Gy at doses below 6.4 Gy for both manual and automated scoring procedures), but showed a limitation of the assay at the dose point of 6.4 Gy, which resulted in a clear dose underestimation in all cases. The MAD values (without 6.4 Gy) differed significantly (P = 0.03) between manual (0.25 Gy, SEM = 0.06, n = 4) or automated scoring procedures (0.37 Gy, SEM = 0.08, n = 5), but lowest MAD were equal (0.2 Gy) for both scoring procedures. Likewise, both scoring procedures led to the same allocation of dose estimates to triage categories of clinical significance (about 83% accuracy and up to 100% specificity).

AB - The focus of the study is an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25-5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. The CBMN assay was performed according to protocols individually established and varying among participating laboratories. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 4 days after sample arrival. The CBMN dose estimates were reported with high accuracy (MAD values of 0.20-0.50 Gy at doses below 6.4 Gy for both manual and automated scoring procedures), but showed a limitation of the assay at the dose point of 6.4 Gy, which resulted in a clear dose underestimation in all cases. The MAD values (without 6.4 Gy) differed significantly (P = 0.03) between manual (0.25 Gy, SEM = 0.06, n = 4) or automated scoring procedures (0.37 Gy, SEM = 0.08, n = 5), but lowest MAD were equal (0.2 Gy) for both scoring procedures. Likewise, both scoring procedures led to the same allocation of dose estimates to triage categories of clinical significance (about 83% accuracy and up to 100% specificity).

KW - Adult

KW - Automation

KW - Biological Assay/methods

KW - Cells, Cultured/radiation effects

KW - Cytokinesis/radiation effects

KW - Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation

KW - Humans

KW - Laboratory Proficiency Testing

KW - Leukocytes/radiation effects

KW - Male

KW - Micronucleus Tests/methods

KW - Radiation Injuries/diagnosis

KW - Radioactive Hazard Release

KW - Radiometry/methods

KW - Reproducibility of Results

KW - Sensitivity and Specificity

KW - Single-Blind Method

KW - Time Factors

KW - Triage/methods

U2 - 10.1667/RR3234.1

DO - 10.1667/RR3234.1

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 23862731

VL - 180

SP - 120

EP - 128

IS - 2

ER -