Effect of prolonging radiation delivery time on retention of gammaH2AX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Compared to conventional external beam radiotherapy, IMRT requires significantly more time to deliver the dose. Prolonging dose delivery potentially increases DNA repair which would reduce the biological effect. We questioned whether retention of gammaH2AX, a measure of lack of repair of DNA damage, would decrease when dose delivery was protracted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Exponentially growing SiHa cervical carcinoma cells were irradiated with 6 MV photons in a water tank using a VarianEX linear accelerator. Cells held at 37 degrees C received 2 Gy in 0.5 min and 4 Gy in 1 min. To evaluate effect of dose delivery prolongation, 2 and 4 Gy were delivered in 30 and 60 min. After 24 h recovery, cells were analyzed for clonogenic survival and for residual gammaH2AX as measured using flow cytometry. RESULTS: Increasing the dose delivery time from 0.5 or 1 min to 30 or 60 min produced a significant increase in cell survival from 0.45 to 0.48 after 2 Gy, and from 0.17 to 0.20 after 4 Gy. Expression of residual gammaH2AX decreased from 1.27 to 1.22 relative to background after 2 Gy and 1.46 to 1.39 relative to background after 4 Gy, but differences were not statistically significant. The relative differences in the slopes of residual gammaH2AX versus dose for acute versus prolonged irradiation bordered on significant (p = 0.055), and the magnitude of the change was consistent with the observed increase in surviving fraction. CONCLUSION: These results support the concept that DNA repair underlies the increase in survival observed when dose delivery is prolonged. They also help to establish the limits of sensitivity of residual gammaH2AX, as measured using flow cytometry, for detecting differences in response to irradiation.
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".