Cisplatin Radiosensitization of DNA Irradiated with 2–20 eV Electrons: Role of Transient Anions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Platinum chemotherapeutic agents, such as cisplatin ( cis -diamminedichloroplatinum(II)), can act as radiosensitizers when bound covalently to nuclear DNA in cancer cells. This radiosensitization is largely due to an increase in DNA damage induced by low-energy secondary electrons, produced in large quantities by high-energy radiation. We report the yields of single- and double-strand breaks (SSB and DSB) and interduplex cross-links (CL) induced by electrons of 1.6–19.6 eV (i.e., the yield functions) incident on 5 monolayer (ML) films of cisplatin–DNA complexes. These yield functions are compared with those previously recorded with 5 ML films of unmodified plasmid DNA. Binding of five cisplatin molecules to plasmid DNA (3197 base pairs) enhances SSB, DSB, and CL by factors varying, from 1.2 to 2.8, 1.4 to 3.5, and 1.2 to 2.7, respectively, depending on electron energy. All yield functions exhibit structures around 5 and 10 eV that can be attributed to enhancement of bond scission, via the initial formation of core-excited resonances associated with π → π* transitions of the bases. This increase in damage is interpreted as arising from a modification of the parameters of the corresponding transient anions already present in nonmodified DNA, particularly those influencing molecular dissociation. Two additional resonances, specific to cisplatin-modified DNA, are formed at 13.6 and 17.6 eV in the yield function of SSB. Furthermore, cisplatin binding causes the induction of DSB by electrons of 1.6–3.6 eV, i.e., in an energy region where a DSB cannot be produced by a single electron in pure DNA. Breaking two bonds with a subexcitation-energy electron is tentatively explained by a charge delocalization mechanism, where a single electron occupies simultaneously two σ* bonds linking the Pt atom to guanine bases on opposite strands.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".