Lack of genotoxicity in medical oncology nurses handling antineoplastic drugs: Effect of work environment and protective equipment

Abstract

Objective: In this study we aimed to investigate the genotoxic effects of antineoplastic agents in occupationaly exposed oncology nurses. Genotoxic effects mean the disruptive effects in the integrity of DNA and they are associated with cancer development. Biomonitoring of health care workers handling antineoplastic agents is helpful for the evaluation of exposure to cytostatics. Participants: The study included an exposed and two control groups. The exposed group (n = 9) was comprised of oncology nurses. The first (n = 9) and second (n = 10) control groups were comprised of subjects who did not come into contact with antineoplastic drugs working respectively in the same department with oncology nurses and in different departments. Methods: Genotoxicity evaluation was performed using SCE analysis. After applying culture, harvest and chromosome staining procedures, a total of 25 metaphases were analyzed per person. Kruskal Wallis test was used to perform statistical analysis. Result: A statistically significant difference of sister chromatid exchange frequencies was not observed between the exposed and control groups. Conclusion: Lack of genotoxicity in medical oncology nurses might be due to good working conditions with high standards of technical equipment and improved personal protection.

Evaluation of the in vivo genotoxicity of liposomal formulation for delivering anticancer estrogenic derivative (ESC8) in a mouse model

“…Chemotherapy agents usually possess a low therapeutic index i.e., while they target the cancer cells, the surrounding normal cells are also affected and hence adversely affect cancer patients, which strictly limits their use. Besides, some research studies have evaluated the hazards to employees handling anti-cancer drugs (Gulten et al, 2011, Kopjar et al, 2009). The health hazards for medical workers handling these drugs is a key concern equally, since these drugs are categorized as potentially mutagenic, carcinogenic or teratogenic (Turci et al, 2002).…”

Relation between DNA damage measured by comet assay and OGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism in antineoplastic drugs biomonitoring

“…Cytostatic drugs have been proven to be mutagens, carcinogens and teratogens [6][7][8][9][10][11]. The first chemotherapeutics developed were chemicals that interact directly with DNA by covalent binding or other, or indirectly by interfering with DNA synthesis.…”

“…However, most if not all of such chemical agents are generally nonselective and, along with tumour cells, normal cells may also undergo cytotoxic/genotoxic damage [5,13,14]. According to European Guidelines (Corrigendum to Directive 2004/37/EG), any use of carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic substances, including their application in health care settings, are deemed to be of the highest risk level [8][9][10][11]15].…”

Preventing the contamination of hospital personnel by cytotoxic agents: evaluation and training of the para-professional healthcare workers in oncology units

“…In order to prevent the healthcare personnel from contamination, both individual protection measures, for which personal protective equipment (PPE) plays a key role (ASHP 2006;Connor & Mc Diarmid 2006;Gulten et al 2011), and prevention measures have to be consid-ered, through an adapted training for concerned healthcare workers (Dussart et al 2008;Constantinidis et al 2011;Keat et al 2013).…”