medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-3011 (Electronic)

2016, Number 2

<< Back

Rev Cubana Invest Bioméd 2016; 35 (2)

Principles and relevance of the comet assay

Rodríguez-Rey A, Noris-García E, Fundora TMT

Language: Spanish
References: 39
Page: 184-194
PDF size: 104.13 Kb.


ABSTRACT

For several decades now the comet assay (single cell gel electrophoresis assay) has been the method used for the study of deoxyribonucleic acid damage, with multiple applications in genotoxicity assays, biomonitoring studies in humans, molecular epidemiology and ecotoxicology, and a fundamental tool for research into deoxyribonucleic acid damage and repair. The comet assay has stood out for its simplicity, sensitivity, versatility, rapidity and economy. It is a powerful technique based on microscopic visualization of deoxyribonucleic acid images after the cells have been embedded in agarose, lysed and subjected to alkaline electrophoresis. This basic methodology has been broadened, and may now detect with great sensitivity a large variety of deoxyribonucleic acid damage in any type of cell. Inclusion in the assay of enzymes capable of producing specific lesions on the deoxyribonucleic strand has broadened its detection range and sensitivity. However, it is important to bear in mind that its specificity is not absolute. The purpose of the present study is to point out some useful aspects and advantages of the method, and describe the experience with some technical aspects of the procedure, standardized in keeping with the conditions in the laboratory at the institute to extend its use in the country.


REFERENCES

  1. Kassie F, Parzefall W, Knasmuller S. Single cell gel electrophoresis assay: a new technique for human biomonitoring studies. Mutat Res. PubMed. 2000 Jul;463(1):13-31.

  2. Cook PR, Brazell IA, Jost E. Characterization of nuclear structures containing superhelical DNA. Journal of Cell Science. PubMed. 1976 Nov 1;22(2):303–24.

  3. Rydberg B, Johanson KJ. Estimation of DNA strand breaks in single mammalian cells. In: Hanawalt EC, Friedberg EC, Fox CF (eds). DNA Repair Mechanisms. New York: Academic Press; 1978. p. 465-8.

  4. Ostling O, Johanson KJ. Microeletrophoretic study of radiation induced DNA damage in individual mammalian cells. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 1984;123(1):291-8.

  5. Singh NP, McCoy MT, Tice RR, Schneider EL. A simple technique for quantitation of low levels of DNA damage in individual cells. Expl Cell Res. PubMed. 1988 Mar;175(1):184-91.

  6. Olive PL, Banáth JP, Durand RE. Heterogeneity in radiation-induced DNA damage and repair in tumor and normal cells measured using the "comet" assay. Radiat. Res. PubMed. 1990 Apr;122(1):86-94.

  7. Rojas E, López MC, Valverde M. Single cell gel electrophoresis assay: methodology and applications. Journal of Chromatography Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1999 Feb [cited 2011 Dec 10]; 22(1-2):5. Available from: http://hinari-gw.who.int/whalecompdn.sciencedirect.com/whalecom0 /science?_ob=MiamiImageURL&_cid=271410&_user=2778716&_pii=S0378434798 003132&_check=y&_origin=browse&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=1999-02- 05&wchp=dGLzVlS-zSkWA&md5=e53a2ab93d733a229dfd16626e9d7ad9/1-s2.0- S0378434798003132-main.pdf

  8. Singh NP, Tice RR, Stephens RE, Schneider EL. A microgel electrophoresis technique for the direct quantitation of DNA damage and repair in individual fibroblasts cultured on microscope slides. Mutat Res. PubMed. 1991 Jun;252(3):289-96.

  9. Chuang CH, Hu ML. Use of whole blood directly for single-cell gel electrophoresis (comet) assay in vivo and white blood cells for in vitro assay. Mutat Res. PubMed. 2004 Nov 14;564(1):75-82.

  10. Duthie SJ, Pirie L, Jenkinson AM, Narayanan S. Cryopreserved versus freshly isolated lymphocytes in human biomonitoring: endogenous and induced DNA damage, antioxidant status and repair capability. Mutagenesis. PubMed. 2002 May;17(3):211-4.

  11. Giovannelli L, Pitozzi V, Riolo S, Dolara P. Measurement of DNA breaks and oxidative damage in polymorphonuclear and mononuclear white blood cells: a novel approach using the comet assay. Mutat Res. PubMed. 2003 Jul 8;538(1-2):71-80.

  12. Olive PL, Durand RE. Heterogeneity in DNA Damage using the Comet Assay. Cytometry Part A. 2005 May 27;66A(1):1–8.

  13. Collins AR, Gaivao I. DNA base excision repair as a biomarker in molecular epidemiology. Molecular aspects of medicine. 2007 May 18;28:307-22.

  14. Mc Kelvey-Martin VJ, Green MHL, Schmezer P, Pool-Zobel BL, De Meo MP, Collins A, et al. The single cell gel electrophoresis assay (Comet assay): a European review. Mutat Res. PubMed. 1993 Jul;288(1):47-63.

  15. Collins AR. The Comet Assay for DNA Damage and Repair, Principles, Applications, and Limitations. Molecular Biotechnology. 2004 March [cited 2011 Sept 10];26(3):3. Available from: http://hinarigw. who.int/whalecomwww.springerlink.com/whalecom0/content/e62l3p154h35ttn8 /fulltext.pdf

  16. Tice RR, Agurell E, Andreson D, Burlinson B, Hartmann A, Kobayashi H, et al. Single cell gel/Comet assay: Guidelines for in vitro and in vivo genetic toxicology testing. Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis. 2000 Jun 6 [cited 2013 Mar 11];35(3):5. Available from: http://hinarigw. who.int/whalecomonlinelibrary.wiley.com/whalecom0/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1098- 2280(2000)35:3%3C206::AID-EM8%3E3.0.CO;2-J/pdf.

  17. Collins AR. Investigating oxidative DNA damage and its repair using the comet assay. Mutation Research. PubMed. 2009 Jan-Feb;681(1):24–32.

  18. Lagroye I, Hook GJ, Wettring BA, Baty JD, Moros EG, Straube WL, et al. Measurements of alkali-labile DNA damage and protein-DNA crosslinks after 2450 MHz microwave and low-dose gamma irradiation in vitro. Radiation Research. PubMed. 2004 Feb;161(2):201-14.

  19. Wozniak K, Blasiak J. Nickel impairs the repair of UV-and MNNG-damaged DNA. Cellular and Molecular Biology Letters. PubMed. 2004;9(1):83-94.

  20. Hartmann A, Schumacher M, Plappert-Helbig U, Lowe P, Suter W, Mueller L, et al. Use of the alkaline in vivo comet assay for mechanistic genotoxicity investigations. Mutagenesis. PubMed. 2004 Jan;19(1):51-9.

  21. Collins AR, Dusinská M, Horváthová E, Munro E, Savio M, Stetina R, et al. Interindividual differences in repair of DNA base oxidation, measured in vitro with the comet assay. Mutagenesis. PubMed. 2001 Jul;16(4):297-301.

  22. Collins AR, Oscoz AA, Brunborg G, Gaivao I, Giovannelli L, Kruszewski M, et al. The comet assay: topical issues. Mutagenesis. PubMed. 2008 May;23(3):143–51.

  23. Hartmann A, Plappert U, Poetter F, Suter W. Comparative study with the alkaline comet assay and the chromosome aberration test. Mutation Research. PubMed. 2003 Apr 20;536(1-2):27-38.

  24. Roser S, Pool BL, Rechkemmer G. Contribution of apoptosis to responses in the comet assay. Mutation Research. PubMed. 2001 Oct 18;497(1-2):169-75.

  25. Gadano A, Gurni A, Carballo MA. Screening genotóxico de hierbas medicinales utilizadas en la medicina tradicional argentina. Acta Toxicol. Argent. 2004 [cited 2013 Mar 11];12 (1):10. Available from: ttp://www.ataonline.org.ar/bibliotecavirtual/acta_toxicologica/ata12_1.pdf

  26. Vindas R, Ortiz F, Ramírez V, Cuenca P. Genotoxicidad de tres plaguicidas utilizados en la actividad bananera de Costa Rica. Revista de Biología Tropical. Sept 2004 [citada 11 Dic 2011];52(3):5. Available from:http://www.scielo.sa.cr/scielo.php?pid=S0034- 77442004000300022&script=sci_arttext.

  27. Cárdenas O, Varona M, Patiño RI, Groot H, Sicard D, Tórres MM, et al. Exposición a solventes orgánicos y efectos genotóxicos en trabajadores de fábricas de pinturas en Bogotá. Rev Salud Pública. 2007 May 10;9(2):275-88.

  28. Salagovic J, Gilles J, Verschaeve L, Kalina I. The comet assay for the detection of genotoxic damage in the earthworms: a promising tool for assessing the biological hazards of polluted sites. Folia Biologica. PubMed. 1996;42(1-2):17-21.

  29. McKenna DJ, Doherty BA, Downes CS, McKeown SR, McKelvey-Martin VJ. Use of the Comet-FISH Assay to Compare DNA Damage and Repair in p53 and hTERT Genes following Ionizing radiation. PLoS One. 2012 Oct 9;7(11):e49364.

  30. Lazcano E, Sánchez LM, Benowitz N, Barbosa L, Hernández M. Elevada concentración de metabolitos de cotinina en hijos de padres fumadores. Salud Pública de México. 2007;49(sup 2):213-223.

  31. Garaj V, Gajski G, Vlatka B. Alkaline comet assay as a biomarker of DNAdamage encountered in workers engaged in cigarette manufacturing. Periodicum biologorum. 2009 Mar 31;111(1):85–90.

  32. Moktar A, Ravoori S, Vadhanm MV, Pan J, Rai SN, Jenson AB, et al. Vaginal cells of smokers are more resistant to human papillomavirus infection than that of non-smokers. Exp Mol Pathol. PubMed. 2012 Dec;93(3):422-7.

  33. Piperakis SM, Kontogianni K, Karanastasi G, Iakovidou-Kritsi Z, Piperakis MM. The use of comet assay in measuring DNA damage and repair efficiency in child, adult, and old age populations. Cell Biol Toxicol. PubMed. 2009 Feb;25(1):65–71.

  34. Davies RC, Pettijohn K, Fike F, Wang J, Nahas SA, Tunuguntla R, et al. Defective DNA double-strand break repair in pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. PubMed. 2012 Feb;64(2):568-78.

  35. Zhanataev AK, Lisitsyna TA, Durnev AD, Nasonov EL, Seredenin SB. Effect of afobazole on DNA damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Bull Exp Biol Med. PubMed. 2009 Oct;148(4):602-5.

  36. Karaman A, Binici DN, Melikoglu MA. Comet assay and analysis of micronucleus formation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Mutat Res. PubMed. 2011 Mar 18;721(1):1-5.

  37. Kasznicki J, Kosmalski M, Sliwinska A, Mrowicka M, Stanczyk M, Majsterek I, et al. Evaluation of oxidative stress markers in pathogenesis of diabetic neuropathy. Mol Biol Rep. PubMed. 2012 Sep;39(9):8669-78.

  38. Prieto EA, Llópiz ND. Normalización de la electroforesis de células individuales (Ensayo Cometa). Revista Cubana de Investigaciones Biomédicas. 1999 [citada 11 Dic 2011];18(1):1. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/ibi/v18n1/ibi13199.pdf

  39. García EN, Rey AR, Santisteban MW, Hernandez LR, Robinson MA, Cabrera AP, et al. Niveles de plomo y daño en el ADN en niños con trastornos del espectro autista. Revista cubana de higiene y epidemiología; 2013.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com