Photodynamic Therapy Resistant Human Colon Carcinoma HT29 Cells Show Cross‐Resistance to UVA but not UVC Light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The isolation of photodynamic therapy (PDT)-resistant HT29 human colon adenocarcinoma cells has been reported previously. These PDT-resistant variants show increased expression of the Hsp27 and BNip3 proteins and a decreased expression of mutant p53 protein compared with parental HT29 cells. Because mutant p53 and increased expression of Hsp27 have been associated with resistance to various chemotherapeutic agents, whereas BNip3 is a potent inducer of apoptosis, we were interested in determining whether these PDT-resistant cells were cross-resistant to other cytotoxic agents. In the present report, we examined the colony survival of the PDT-resistant HT29 variants and several other clonal variants of HT29 cells to ultraviolet light (UV) treatment. The HT29 PDT-resistant variants showed cross-resistance to long-wavelength UVA (320-400 nm) but not to short-wavelength UVC (200-280 nm) light. Cell sensitivity to UVA or UVC was then correlated with Hsp27, BNip3 and mutant p53 protein levels in the PDT-resistant variants as well as in several clonal variants of HT29 cells that express different levels of Hsp27, BNip3 and mutant p53. We show that increased expression of Hsp27 and BNip3 and decreased expression of mutant p53 correlated with increased resistance to UVA. In contrast, increased expression of Hsp27 and BNip3 correlated with increased sensitivity to UVC, whereas increased expression of mutant p53 showed no significant correlation with sensitivity to UVC. These results suggest that the PDT-resistant HT29 cell variants are differentially sensitized to UVA compared with UVC due, in part at least, through the altered expression levels of BNip3, Hsp27 and mutant p53.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".