Transcriptional benchmark dose modeling: Exploring how advances in chemical risk assessment may be applied to the radiation field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in "-omics" technologies have simplified capacity to concurrently assess expression profiles of thousands of targets in a cellular system. However, compilation and analysis of "omics" data in support of human health protection remains a challenge. Benchmark dose (BMD) modeling is currently being employed in chemical risk assessment to estimate acceptable levels of exposure. Although typically applied to conventional endpoints, newer software has enabled this application to be extended to transcriptomic datasets. BMD analytical tools now have the capacity to model transcriptional dose-response data to derive meaningful BMD values for genes, pathways and gene ontologies. In this report, radiation data obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) were analyzed to generate BMD values for transcriptional responses. The datasets comprised microarray analyses of human blood gamma-irradiated ex vivo (0-20 Gy) and human-derived cell lines exposed to alpha particle radiation (0.5-1.5 Gy). The distributions of BMDs for statistically significant genes and pathways in response to radiation exposure were examined and compared across studies. BMD modeling could identify pathway/gene sensitivities across wide radiation dose ranges, experimental conditions (time-points, cell types) and radiation qualities. BMD analysis offered a new approach to examine transcriptional data. The results were shown to provide information on transcriptional thresholds of effects to support refined risk assessments for low dose ionizing radiation exposures, derive gene-based values for relative biological effectiveness and identify pathways involved in radiation sensitivities across cell types which may extend to applications a clinical setting. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 57:589-604, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".