MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145298682 · doi:10.1667/rr1649.1

Dynamics of Micronuclei in Rat Skin Fibroblasts after X Irradiation

2009· article· en· W2145298682 on OpenAlexaff
Pavel Kaspler, Melania Pintilie, Rićhard P. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsMicronucleus testIrradiationDynamics (music)RadiochemistryBiophysicsBiologyChemistryPathologyNuclear medicineMolecular biologyMedicinePhysicsInternal medicineToxicityNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a previous study, we demonstrated DNA damage, expressed as micronuclei, in binucleate dermal fibroblasts obtained from human skin 2-9 weeks after fractionated radiotherapy. Here we assessed micronuclei in X-irradiated skin fibroblasts from 9-14-week-old female Lewis rats as a function of time after a single dose of radiation to determine the lifetime of such damage in the skin. After irradiation with 5, 10, 15 and 18 Gy, formation of micronuclei at 1 day or 2 months postirradiation increased up to about 10 Gy, with evidence for a plateau at higher doses. The time course of micronuclei present in the skin fibroblasts demonstrated a plateau region (approximately 20 days after 18 Gy and about 2 months after 10 Gy) before the number of micronuclei started to decline. Residual micronuclei were observed for more than 1 year after irradiation. Monomicronucleated cells predominated in fibroblasts from nonirradiated skin, whereas in fibroblasts from irradiated skin, multimicronucleated cells predominated and persisted (together with monomicronucleated cells) in the residual levels of damage at late times. The results suggest that DNA damage in dermal fibroblasts can be assayed by the micronucleus assay in samples from irradiated skin up to 1 month after irradiation for doses up to at least 10 Gy. Further studies are needed to define the dose-response relationship in detail.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation ResearchSame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207