MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975668759 · doi:10.1002/ijc.1031

Evaluation of cell survival, DNA double strand breaks, and DNA synthesis during concurrent camptothecin and X‐radiation treatments

2001· article· en· W1975668759 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng E. Ng, K. Mazaheri, C. Payant, G. P. Raaphorst

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsOttawa Regional Cancer Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCamptothecinDNARadioresistanceClonogenic assayDNA synthesisMolecular biologyBiologyRadiosensitivityTopoisomeraseDNA damageCell cultureGeneticsBiochemistryRadiation therapyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluated cell survival, DNA double strand breaks (dsbs), and DNA synthesis following camptothecin (CPT) alone or concurrent CPT and X-radiation treatments in exponential-phase cultures of a radioresistant human melanoma cell line. Cell survival was measured by a clonogenic assay. DNA dsbs were measured by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. DNA synthesis was measured by incorporation of (3)H-thymidine. We found that (i) concurrent CPT and X-radiation interacted additively, unlike previous results with plateau-phase cultures of these cells, which showed synergistic interaction; (ii) there were strong negative correlations (correlation coefficients of at least 0.82) between clonogenic surviving fractions and DNA dsbs following CPT alone or concurrent CPT and radiation treatments; and (iii) concurrent CPT and radiation (10 Gy) treatment did not completely inhibit DNA synthesis, even though addition of radiation to CPT did further decrease DNA synthesis (relative to CPT alone) at CPT concentrations below 20 microM. Our results suggest that during concurrent CPT and radiation treatment residual DNA dsb levels were good indicators of cell killing and that the absence of complete inhibition of DNA synthesis could at least in part explain the additive interaction between CPT and radiation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207