MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Formation and repair of oxidatively generated damage in cellular DNA

2017· review· en· W2568928300 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean Cadet, Kelvin J.A. Davies, Marisa Helena Gennari de Medeiros, Paolo Di Mascio, J. Richard Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueFree Radical Biology and Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institute on AgingPro-Reitoria de Pesquisa, Universidade de São PauloNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsDNA damageCell biologyChemistryDNA repairBiophysicsDNABiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this review article, emphasis is placed on the critical survey of available data concerning modified nucleobase and 2-deoxyribose products that have been identified in cellular DNA following exposure to a wide variety of oxidizing species and agents including, hydroxyl radical, one-electron oxidants, singlet oxygen, hypochlorous acid and ten-eleven translocation enzymes. In addition, information is provided about the generation of secondary oxidation products of 8-oxo-7,8-dihydroguanine and nucleobase addition products with reactive aldehydes arising from the decomposition of lipid peroxides. It is worth noting that the different classes of oxidatively generated DNA damage that consist of single lesions, intra- and interstrand cross-links were unambiguously assigned and quantitatively detected on the basis of accurate measurements involving in most cases high performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry. The reported data clearly show that the frequency of DNA lesions generated upon severe oxidizing conditions, including exposure to ionizing radiation is low, at best a few modifications per 106 normal bases. Application of accurate analytical measurement methods has also allowed the determination of repair kinetics of several well-defined lesions in cellular DNA that however concerns so far only a restricted number of cases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations342
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueFree Radical Biology and MedicineSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207