Search

We recently characterized the association between DNA damage and immunoresponse in vivo in colonic mucosa of mice infected with a Salmonella Typhimurium strain expressing a genotoxin, known as typhoid toxin. In this protocol, we describe the specific steps for assessing DNA damage by the alkaline comet assay of colonic mucosal samples. The description of the comet assay protocol follows the international guidelines (Minimum Information for Reporting on the Comet Assay [Moller et al., 2020]). For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Martin et al. (2021)., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2021 The Author(s).)

DNA damage and repair activity are often assessed in blood samples from humans in different types of molecular epidemiology studies. However, it is not always feasible to analyse the samples on the day of collection without any type of storage. For instance, certain studies use repeated sampling of cells from the same subject or samples from different subjects collected at different time-points, and it is desirable to analyse all these samples in the same comet assay experiment. In addition, flawless comet assay analyses on frozen samples open up the possibility of using this technique on biobank material. In this article we discuss the use of cryopreserved peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), buffy coat (BC) and whole blood (WB) for analysis of DNA damage and repair using the comet assay. The published literature and the authors' experiences indicate that various types of blood samples can be cryopreserved with only a minor effect on the basal level of DNA damage. There is evidence to suggest that WB and PBMCs can be cryopreserved for several years without much effect on the level of DNA damage. However, care should be taken when cryopreserving WB and BCs. It is possible to use either fresh or frozen samples of blood cells, but results from fresh and frozen cells should not be used in the same dataset. The article outlines detailed protocols for the cryopreservation of PBMCs, BCs and WB samples., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the UK Environmental Mutagen Society.All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The alkaline comet assay, or single cell gel electrophoresis, is one of the most popular methods for assessing DNA damage in human population. One of the open issues concerning this assay is the identification of those factors that can explain the large inter-individual and inter-laboratory variation. International collaborative initiatives such as the hCOMET project - a COST Action launched in 2016 - represent a valuable tool to meet this challenge. The aims of hCOMET were to establish reference values for the level of DNA damage in humans, to investigate the effect of host factors, lifestyle and exposure to genotoxic agents, and to compare different sources of assay variability. A database of 19,320 subjects was generated, pooling data from 105 studies run by 44 laboratories in 26 countries between 1999 and 2019. A mixed random effect log-linear model, in parallel with a classic meta-analysis, was applied to take into account the extensive heterogeneity of data, due to descriptor, specimen and protocol variability. As a result of this analysis interquartile intervals of DNA strand breaks (which includes alkali-labile sites) were reported for tail intensity, tail length, and tail moment (comet assay descriptors). A small variation by age was reported in some datasets, suggesting higher DNA damage in oldest age-classes, while no effect could be shown for sex or smoking habit, although the lack of data on heavy smokers has still to be considered. Finally, highly significant differences in DNA damage were found for most exposures investigated in specific studies. In conclusion, these data, which confirm that DNA damage measured by the comet assay is an excellent biomarker of exposure in several conditions, may contribute to improving the quality of study design and to the standardization of results of the comet assay in human populations., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no declarations of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The comet assay is a widely used test for the detection of DNA damage and repair activity. However, there are interlaboratory differences in reported levels of baseline and induced damage in the same experimental systems. These differences may be attributed to protocol differences, although it is difficult to identify the relevant conditions because detailed comet assay procedures are not always published. Here, we present a Consensus Statement for the Minimum Information for Reporting Comet Assay (MIRCA) providing recommendations for describing comet assay conditions and results. These recommendations differentiate between 'desirable' and 'essential' information: 'essential' information refers to the precise details that are necessary to assess the quality of the experimental work, whereas 'desirable' information relates to technical issues that might be encountered when repeating the experiments. Adherence to MIRCA recommendations should ensure that comet assay results can be easily interpreted and independently verified by other researchers.

The comet assay is a well-accepted biomonitoring tool to examine the effect of dietary, lifestyle, environmental and occupational exposure on levels of DNA damage in human cells. With such a wide range of determinants for DNA damage levels, it becomes challenging to deal with confounding and certain factors are inter-related (e.g. poor nutritional intake may correlate with smoking status). This review describes the effect of intrinsic (i.e. sex, age, tobacco smoking, occupational exposure and obesity) and extrinsic (season, environmental exposures, diet, physical activity and alcohol consumption) factors on the level of DNA damage measured by the standard or enzyme-modified comet assay. Although each factor influences at least one comet assay endpoint, the collective evidence does not indicate single factors have a large impact. Thus, controlling for confounding may be necessary in a biomonitoring study, but none of the factors is strong enough to be regarded a priori as a confounder. Controlling for confounding in the comet assay requires a case-by-case approach. Inter-laboratory variation in levels of DNA damage and to some extent also reproducibility in biomonitoring studies are issues that have haunted the users of the comet assay for years. Procedures to collect specimens, and their storage, are not standardized. Likewise, statistical issues related to both sample-size calculation (before sampling of specimens) and statistical analysis of the results vary between studies. This review gives guidance to statistical analysis of the typically complex exposure, co-variate, and effect relationships in human biomonitoring studies., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The comet assay (single cell gel electrophoresis) is widely used as a biomonitoring tool to assess DNA damage - strand breaks, as well as oxidised bases; it can also be adapted to measure DNA repair. It is based on the ability of breaks in the DNA to relax supercoiling, allowing DNA loops to extend from the nuclear core (nucleoid) under an electric field to form a comet-like tail. Most commonly, it is applied to white blood cells. The range of detection is between a few hundred breaks per cell and a few thousand, encompassing levels of damage that can be repaired and tolerated by human cells. Its applications include monitoring various diseases, studying the influence of nutrition on DNA stability, and investigating effects of environmental and occupational mutagens. Here we address the issue of inter-laboratory variation in comet assay results. This variation is largely due to differences in methods. Imposing a standard protocol is not practical, but users should be aware of the crucial parameters that affect performance of the assay. These include the concentration of agarose in which the cells are embedded; the duration of cell lysis, and of enzyme incubation when oxidised bases are being measured; the duration of alkaline unwinding; the duration of electrophoresis and the voltage gradient applied; and the method used to score the comets. Including reference standards in each experiment allows experimental variability to be monitored - and if variation is not extreme, results can be normalised using reference standard values. Reference standards are also essential for inter-laboratory comparison. Finally, we offer recommendations which, we believe, will limit variability and increase the usefulness of this assay in molecular epidemiology., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Even if the comet assay has been widely used for decades, there is still a need for controlled studies and good mathematical models to assess the variability of the different versions of this assay and in particular to assess potential intra-experimental variability of the high-throughput comet assay. To address this point, we further validate a high-throughput comet assay that uses hydrophilic polyester film (Gelbond®). Experiments were performed using human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) either untreated or treated with different concentration of MMS (methyl methanesulfonate). A positive control for the Fpg (Formamidopyrimidine DNA glycosylase)-modified comet assay (Ro 19-8022 with light) was also included. To quantify the sources of variability of the assay, including intradeposit variability, instead of summarizing DNA damage on 50 cells from a deposit by the mean or median of their percentage DNA tail, we analyzed all logit-transformed data with a linear mixed model. The main source of variation in our experimental data is between cells within the same deposit, suggesting genuine variability in the response of the cells rather than variation caused by technical treatment of cell samples. The second source of variation is the inter-experimental variation (day-to-day experiment); the coefficient of this variation for the control was 13.6%. The variation between deposits in the same experiment is negligible. Moreover, there is no systematic bias because of the position of samples on the Gelbond ® film nor the position of the films in the electrophoresis tank. This high-throughput comet assay is thus reliable for various applications. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 59:595-602, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)