Potentiation of Cell Killing by Low-Dose-Rate Radiation by Camptothecin is Related to an Increase in the Level of DNA Double-Strand Breaks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the ability of camptothecin to potentiate cell killing by low-dose-rate irradiation and whether this potentiation was associated with an increase in the level of residual DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Human melanoma (Sk-Mel-3) cells, grown to the confluent phase, were treated with low-dose-rate radiation (0.88 cGy/min) alone, camptothecin alone, or concurrent camptothecin and low-dose-rate radiation. Cell survival was determined using a clonogenic assay. The interactions between camptothecin and low-dose-rate radiation were analyzed further using isobolograms. DNA DSBs were determined using the neutral comet assay. We found that 10 and 25 microM camptothecin, but not 1 microM, camptothecin potentiated cell killing significantly relative to that seen with low-dose-rate radiation alone. Unexpectedly, the potentiation of the effects of low-dose-rate radiation by camptothecin was accompanied by large increases in the alpha parameter of the linear-quadratic fit rather than in the beta parameter. This suggests a modification of intrinsic radiosensitivity rather than of repair of sublethal damage. From isobologram analysis, low-dose-rate radiation interacted either additively or supra-additively with 25 or 10 microM camptothecin. Conversely, the interaction of low-dose-rate radiation with 1 microM camptothecin was subadditive. Finally, there were strong correlations (correlation coefficients >0.9) between surviving fraction and either comet tail length or comet tail moment after concurrent treatment with 25 microM camptothecin and low-dose-rate radiation. This suggests that the level of residual DNA DSBs was a good indicator of cell killing after treatment with low-dose-rate radiation plus 25 microM camptothecin.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".