Comparative analysis of the yields of dicentrics and chromosomal translocations

Purpose: Chromosomal dicentrics and translocations are commonly employed as biomarkers to estimate radiation doses. The main goal of this article is to perform a comparative analysis of yields of both types of aberrations. The objective is to determine if there are relevant distinctions between both...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Mlynarczyk, D., Puig, P., Barquinero, J. F., Armero, C., Gómez-Rubio, V.
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2024
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:2072/537871
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/2072/537871
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Bivariate zero-inflated Poisson model
FISH-painting
PAINT and conventional nomenclatures
Radiation-induced chromosome aberrations
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose: Chromosomal dicentrics and translocations are commonly employed as biomarkers to estimate radiation doses. The main goal of this article is to perform a comparative analysis of yields of both types of aberrations. The objective is to determine if there are relevant distinctions between both yields, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of their respective suitability and accuracy in the estimation of radiation doses. Materials and methods: The analysis involved data from a partial-radiation simulation study with the calibration data obtained through two scoring methods: conventional and PAINT modified. Subsequently, a Bayesian bivariate zero-inflated Poisson model was employed to compare the posterior marginal density of the mean of dicentrics and translocations and assess the differences between them. Results: When employing the conventional method of scoring, the findings indicate that there is no notable disparity between the yield of observed translocations and dicentrics. However, when utilizing the PAINT modified method, a notable discrepancy is observed for higher doses, indicating a relevant difference in the mean number of the two types of aberrations. Conclusions: The choice of scoring method significantly influences the analysis of radiation-induced aberrations, especially when distinguishing between complex and simple chromosomal formations. Further research and analysis are necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the factors and mechanisms impacting the formation of dicentrics and translocations.