1999
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1263(199911/12)19:6<401::aid-jat592>3.0.co;2-h
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of sister chromatid exchange and micronuclei in peripheral blood lymphocytes of nurses handling cytostatic drugs

Abstract: The genotoxic effect of occupational exposure of 20 nurses who handled cytostatic drugs in medical oncology and haematology units was evaluated by micronucleus and sister chromatide exchange test. The duration of employment in the units and of exposure to cytostatics ranged from 1 to 31 years. The exposed nurses manifested an increase in cells with micronuclei as compared to the control group (P < 0.05). Nurses exposed to cytostatic drugs for 20–31 years showed a higher frequency of micronuclei (P < 0.05), whe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
3

Year Published

1999
1999
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
8
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, there are controversial results with respect to exposure duration. Studies by Kevekordes et al (1998), Kasuba et al (1999), Laffon et al (2005), Cavallo et al (2007), Rekhadevi et al (2007), and Kopjar et al (2009) noted a correlation between years of exposure and rise of MN rate. In addition, Laffon et al (2005) reported this effect after 10 yr of cumulative exposure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there are controversial results with respect to exposure duration. Studies by Kevekordes et al (1998), Kasuba et al (1999), Laffon et al (2005), Cavallo et al (2007), Rekhadevi et al (2007), and Kopjar et al (2009) noted a correlation between years of exposure and rise of MN rate. In addition, Laffon et al (2005) reported this effect after 10 yr of cumulative exposure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the studies about the eŠects of occupational exposures at the cellular level, several groups reported that signiˆcant diŠerences were observed between the frequencies of SCEs, 3) chromosome aberration (CA), 21) micronuclei (MN), 4) and commet assay, 7) while other groups reported no signiˆcant diŠerences between the frequency of SCEs, 2,4,5) CA, 2) and MN. 2) Further, only Roth 2) and Kopjar 7) reported obvious correlation between cellular level eŠects of hazardous drugs and working environments.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These ®ndings may be explained by the unspeci®c nature of these markers and the multitude of factors (e.g., individual susceptibility, variability in DNA repair, working conditions, lifestyle, study design, dosimetry procedures) that could have undesired in¯uences on the outcome of human biomonitoring studies. The lack of signi®cant dierences in SCE between exposed probands and controls observed in our study is in good accordance with recently published data (Lanza et al 1999, Kasuba et al 1999, and may be related to the use of protective equipment at work that is expected to determine the genotoxic impact of occupational exposure to anticancer drugs. For instance, Kevekordes et al (1998) found signi®cant increases of SCEs and MN frequencies in ten nurses who were considered to be exposed to high amounts of antineoplastic agents, after malfunction of a safety hood.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%