Response to pulsed dose rate and low dose rate irradiation with and without mild hyperthermia using human breast carcinoma cell lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to establish whether a pulsed dose rate (PDR) treatment of 1.5 Gy given every 3 h in combination with 41 degrees C mild hyperthermia or a continuous low dose rate (LDR) treatment with mild hyperthermia could radiosensitize two isogenic human breast carcinoma cell lines in comparison to pulsed dose rate or low dose rate irradiation alone. The radiation resistant cell line was derived from the parental cell line and was transfected to over-express DNA polymerase beta. The end-points assessed were the survival of the cells using the clonogenic assay, the amount of residual DSB(s) using the comet assay and gene expression of polymerase beta using RT-PCR. Results showed that the PDR and LDR treatments combined with mild hyperthermia caused significant radiosensitization when compared to PDR and LDR irradiation alone in terms of the clonogenic and comet assays with both cell lines. RT-PCR results showed that polymerase beta levels of expression were not elevated in response to these treatments, implying that this polymerase may not be involved in sub-lethal damage repair or thermal radiosensitization. These results suggest a potential clinical advantage when combining LDR or PDR with hyperthermia, since they indicate that hyperthermia is an effective radiosensitizer.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".