These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Repair, repopulation and cell cycle redistribution in rat foot skin.
    Author: Rezvani M, Hopewell JW, Morris GM, Wilding D, Whitehouse E, Robbins ME, Cortina-Borja MJ.
    Journal: Radiother Oncol; 1998 Feb; 46(2):193-9. PubMed ID: 9510047.
    Abstract:
    The influence of the phenomena of the repair of sublethal damage, repopulation and the role of the reassortment of surviving clonogenic target cells within the cell cycle have been examined in the foot skin of rats using a series of split dose experiments. The dose-related incidence of moist desquamation was used as an end-point. Initially the iso-effect dose for moist desquamation (ED50) increased with an increasing time interval (1-22 h) between two equal fractions. This effect was attributed to the well established phenomenon of the repair of sublethal damage. This appeared to be maximal with a 22 h gap between fractions. A further increase in the time interval, from 2-7 days, between two equal fractions resulted in a decrease in the ED50 value for moist desquamation. The phenomenon is most likely to be explained by a shortening of the cell cycle time in surviving epithelial target cells as repopulation first initiated. With intervals between two fractions of greater than 10 days the ED50 for moist desquamation again increased. This is likely to represent an increase in the number of epidermal target cells (repopulation). Further evidence for the effect of a reassortment of cells in the cell cycle has come from another study in which a half-tolerance priming dose of 16.8 Gy was followed by three daily fractions starting 48 or 125 h after the priming dose. The ED50 for moist desquamation based on the total fractionated dose (three fractions) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) after the longer time interval, i.e. fractions given on days 5, 6 and 7 after the primary dose. These findings were supported by the results of a cell proliferation kinetic study and jointly question the validity of a frequently made assumption of equal biological effect per fraction in a prolonged fractionated irradiation schedule.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]