4.3 Article

Long term effects of radiation exposure on telomere lengths of leukocytes and its associated biomarkers among atomic-bomb survivors

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 7, Issue 26, Pages 38988-38998

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.8801

Keywords

Ionizing radiation; telomeres; leukocytes; aging; Hiroshima; Gerotarget

Funding

  1. Radiation and Nuclear Countermeasures Program of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
  2. National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health (NIH)
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15H04791] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ionizing radiation (IR) is a major source of cellular damage and the immediate cellular response to IR has been well characterized. But the long-term impact of IR on cell function and its relationship with aging are not known. Here, we examined the IR effects on telomere length and other biomarkers 50 to 68 years post-exposure (two time points per person) in survivors of the atomic bombing at Hiroshima during WWII. We found that telomere length of leukocytes was inversely correlated with the dose of IR (p=0.008), and this effect was primarily found in survivors who were exposed at younger ages; specifically those <12 years old (p=0.0004). Although a dose-related retardation of telomere shortening with age was observed in the cross-sectional data, longitudinal follow-up after 11 years did not show IR exposure-related alteration of the rate of telomere shortening with age. In addition, IR diminished the associations between telomere length and selected aging biomarkers that were observed in survivors with no dose. These included uric acid metabolism, cytokines, and blood T cell counts. These findings showed long-lasting detrimental effects of IR on telomere length of leukocytes in both dose- and age-at-exposure dependent manner, and on alterations of biomarkers with aging.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available