Co gamma rays at 0.5, 2.5 (blind samples), 0 and 2 Gy (reference samples). Following post-exposure incubations of 4 and 24 h, 16 samples were shipped on ice packs to each partner. The samples were stained and scored for gamma-H2AX foci, using manual and/or automated fluorescence microscope scoring strategies. Dose estimates were obtained and used to assign triage categories to the samples. Results: Average dose estimates across all the laboratories correlated well with true doses. The most accurate assignment of triage category was achieved by manual scoring of the 4-h blood and lymphocyte samples. Only three samples out of a total of 46 were miscategorized in a way that could have adversely effected the clinical management of a radiation casualty. Conclusions: This inter-comparison exercise has demonstrated that following a recent acute radiation exposure, the gamma-H2AX assay could be a useful triage tool that can be successfully applied across a network of laboratories. ARTICLE HISTORY

In the event of a mass casualty radiation incident, the gamma-H2AX foci assay could be a useful tool to estimate radiation doses received by individuals. The rapid processing time of blood samples of just a few hours and the potential for batch processing, enabling high throughput, make the assay ideal for early triage categorisation to separate the 'worried well' from the low and critically exposed by quantifying radiation-induced foci in peripheral blood lymphocytes. Within the RENEB framework, 8 European laboratories have taken part in the first European gamma-H2AX biodosimetry exercise, which consisted of a telescoring comparison of 200 circulated foci images taken from 8 samples, and a comparison of 10 fresh blood lymphocyte samples that were shipped overnight to participating labs 4 or 24 h post-exposure. Despite large variations between laboratories in the dose-response relationship for foci induction, the obtained results indicate that the network should be able to use the gamma-H2AX assay for rapidly identifying the most severely exposed individuals within a cohort who could then be prioritised for accurate chromosome dosimetry.

The focus of the study is an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using the γ-H2AX foci assay as a diagnostic triage tool for rapid individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25-4 Gy) as well as blinded test samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were incubated at 37°C for 2 and 24 h (repair time) and sent to the participants. The foci assay was performed according to protocols individually established in participating laboratories and therefore varied. 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) of estimated doses relative to the actual doses was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical relevance to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. First γ-H2AX based dose estimates were reported 7 h after sample receipt. Estimates were similarly accurate for 2 and 24 h repair times, providing scope for its use in the early phase of a radiation exposure incident. Equal accuracy was achieved by scoring 20, 30, 40 or 50 cells per sample. However, MAD values of 0.5-0.7 Gy and 1.3-1.7 Gy divided the data sets into two groups, driven mainly by the considerable differences in foci yields between calibration and blind samples. Foci yields also varied dramatically between laboratories, highlighting reproducibility issues as an important caveat of the foci assay. Nonetheless, foci counts could distinguish high- and low-dose samples in all data sets and binary dose categories of clinical significance could be discriminated with satisfactory accuracy (mean 84%, ±0.03 SEM). Overall, the results suggest that the γ-H2AX assay is a useful tool for rapidly screening individuals for significant exposures that occurred up to at least 24 h earlier, and may help to prioritize cytogenetic dosimetry follow-up.

Radiotherapy is a powerful cure for several types of solid tumours, but its application is often limited because of severe side effects in individual patients. With the aim to find biomarkers capable of predicting normal tissue side reactions we analysed the radiation responses of cells from individual head and neck tumour and breast cancer patients of different clinical radiosensitivity in a multicentric study. Multiple parameters of cellular radiosensitivity were analysed in coded samples of peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) and derived lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) from 15 clinical radio-hypersensitive tumour patients and compared to age- and sex-matched non-radiosensitive patient controls and 15 lymphoblastoid cell lines from age- and sex- matched healthy controls of the KORA study. Experimental parameters included ionizing radiation (IR)-induced cell death (AnnexinV), induction and repair of DNA strand breaks (Comet assay), induction of yH2AX foci (as a result of DNA double strand breaks), and whole genome expression analyses. Considerable inter-individual differences in IR-induced DNA strand breaks and their repair and/or cell death could be detected in primary and immortalised cells with the applied assays. The group of clinically radiosensitive patients was not unequivocally distinguishable from normal responding patients nor were individual overreacting patients in the test system unambiguously identified by two different laboratories. Thus, the in vitro test systems investigated here seem not to be appropriate for a general prediction of clinical reactions during or after radiotherapy due to the experimental variability compared to the small effect of radiation sensitivity. Genome-wide expression analysis however revealed a set of 67 marker genes which were differentially induced 6 h after in vitro-irradiation in lymphocytes from radio-hypersensitive and non-radiosensitive patients. These results warrant future validation in larger cohorts in order to determine parameters potentially predictive for clinical radiosensitivity.

Normal tissue toxicity after radiotherapy shows variability between patients, indicating inter-individual differences in radiosensitivity. Genetic variation probably contributes to these differences. The aim of the present study was to determine if two cell lines, one radiosensitive (RS) and another radioresistant (RR), showed differences in DNA repair capacity, cell viability, cell cycle progression and, in turn, if this response could be characterised by a differential gene expression profile at different post-irradiation times. After irradiation, the RS cell line showed a slower rate of γ-H2AX foci disappearance, a higher frequency of incomplete chromosomal aberrations, a reduced cell viability and a longer disturbance of the cell cycle when compared to the RR cell line. Moreover, a greater and prolonged transcriptional response after irradiation was induced in the RS cell line. Functional analysis showed that 24 h after irradiation genes involved in “DNA damage response”, “direct p53 effectors” and apoptosis were still differentially up-regulated in the RS cell line but not in the RR cell line. The two cell lines showed different response to IR and can be distinguished with cell-based assays and differential gene expression analysis. The results emphasise the importance to identify biomarkers of radiosensitivity for tailoring individualized radiotherapy protocols.