Protection of Human Tumor Cells of Differing Radiosensitivity by WR-1065
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the ability of WR-1065, the biologically active aminothiol form of the clinically used drug amifostine (WR-2721, Ethyol), to protect cultures of two human glioblastoma cell lines of greatly differing radiosensitivity from the cytotoxic effects of gamma radiation. M059J cells are extremely radiosensitive compared to M059K cells (which were derived from the same tumor) and are defective in the DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNAPK)-mediated pathway for the repair of DSBs. In spite of their marked phenotypic differences, the two glioblastoma lines were protected equivalently ( approximately 1.8-fold) after a 30-min preirradiation treatment with 4 mM WR-1065. These findings are in agreement with earlier studies that showed no relationship between the ability of another aminothiol, cysteamine, to protect human tumor cells with differing abilities to repair DSBs and/or radiosensitivity. Thus it appears that differences in intrinsic radiosensitivity and ability to repair DSBs are not important general factors in the modulation of the radiosensitivity of human cells by aminothiols. Because of a previous report that the radiosensitive mutant rodent xrs5 cell line (which, like M059J, is defective in the DNAPK-mediated pathway for repairing DSBs) is unusually refractory to the radioprotective effects of WR-1065, we re-examined the ability of WR-1065 to protect these cells. In contrast to the earlier studies, both the wild-type and mutant rodent lines were protected extensively by WR-1065. This discrepancy might be related to some unknown factor, such as differences in chromatin organization among xrs5 subclones that arise during their karyotypic evolution, possibly leading to altered DNA-drug associations.
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 | 0.000 |
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".