MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035721194 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119924

γ-H2AX as a Marker for Dose Deposition in the Brain of Wistar Rats after Synchrotron Microbeam Radiation

2015· article· en· W2035721194 on OpenAlexafffund
Cristian Fernández-Palomo, Carmel Mothersill, Elke Bräuer‐Krisch, Jean A. Laissue, Colin Seymour, Elisabeth Schültke

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsEuropean Synchrotron Radiation FacilityEuropean Cooperation in Science and TechnologyEuropean Commission
KeywordsMicrobeamBystander effectDNA damageBiomarkerPathologySynchrotron radiationIrradiationMedicineRadiation therapyGliomaNuclear medicineCancer researchBiologyDNAInternal medicineImmunologyPhysicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Synchrotron radiation has shown high therapeutic potential in small animal models of malignant brain tumours. However, more studies are needed to understand the radiobiological effects caused by the delivery of high doses of spatially fractionated x-rays in tissue. The purpose of this study was to explore the use of the γ-H2AX antibody as a marker for dose deposition in the brain of rats after synchrotron microbeam radiation therapy (MRT). METHODS: Normal and tumour-bearing Wistar rats were exposed to 35, 70 or 350 Gy of MRT to their right cerebral hemisphere. The brains were extracted either at 4 or 8 hours after irradiation and immediately placed in formalin. Sections of paraffin-embedded tissue were incubated with anti γ-H2AX primary antibody. RESULTS: While the presence of the C6 glioma does not seem to modulate the formation of γ-H2AX in normal tissue, the irradiation dose and the recovery versus time are the most important factors affecting the development of γ-H2AX foci. Our results also suggest that doses of 350 Gy can trigger the release of bystander signals that significantly amplify the DNA damage caused by radiation and that the γ-H2AX biomarker does not only represent DNA damage produced by radiation, but also damage caused by bystander effects. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we suggest that the γ-H2AX foci should be used as biomarker for targeted and non-targeted DNA damage after synchrotron radiation rather than a tool to measure the actual physical doses.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207