Gold Nanoparticles Enhance DNA Damage Induced by Anti-cancer Drugs and Radiation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemotherapeutic agent cisplatin was chemically linked to pGEM-3Zf(-) plasmid DNA to produce a cisplatin-DNA complex, Gold nanoparticles, which bind electrostatically to pure DNA, could also be added to this complex. Dry films of pure plasmid DNA and DNA-cisplatin, DNA-gold nanoparticles and DNA-cisplatin-gold nanoparticles complexes were bombarded by 60 keV electrons. The yields of single- and double-strand breaks were measured as a function of exposure by electrophoresis. From a comparison of such yields from the different type of films, we found that the binding of only one gold nanoparticle to a plasmid-cisplatin complex containing 3197 base pairs increases by a factor of 3 the efficiency of the chemotherapeutic agent cisplatin to produce double-strand breaks in irradiated DNA. Furthermore, adding two cisplatin molecules and one gold nanoparticle to DNA enhances radiation-induced DSBs by a factor of 7.5. A number of phenomena could contribute to this huge enhancement, including the higher density of low-energy electrons and reactive species around the gold nanoparticles and the weakening of bonds adjacent to cisplatin in the DNA backbone. The addition of gold nanoparticles to cisplatin and other platinum agents may therefore provide interesting avenues of research to improve the treatment of cancer by concomitant chemoradiation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it