MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086730670 · doi:10.1080/09553002.2020.1820096

Challenges in the quantification approach to a radiation relevant adverse outcome pathway for lung cancer

2020· article· en· W3086730670 on OpenAlexaff
R. Stainforth, Jan Schuemann, Aimee L. McNamara, Ruth C. Wilkins, Vinita Chauhan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Radiation Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) provide a modular framework for describing sequences of biological key events (KEs) and key event relationships (KERs) across levels of biological organization. Empirical evidence across KERs can support construction of quantified AOPs (qAOPs). Using an example AOP of energy deposition from ionizing radiation onto DNA leading to lung cancer incidence, we investigate the feasibility of quantifying data from KERs supported by all types of stressors. The merits and challenges of this process in the context of AOP construction are discussed.Materials and methods Empirical evidence across studies of dose-response from four KERs of the AOP were compiled independently for quantification. Three upstream KERs comprised of evidence from various radiation types in line with AOP guidelines. For these three KERs, a focused analysis of data from alpha-particle studies was undertaken to better characterize the process to the adverse outcome (AO) for a radon gas stressor. Numerical information was extracted from tables and graphs to plot and tabulate the response of KEs. To complement areas of the AOP quantification process, Monte Carlo (MC) simulations in TOPAS-nBio were performed to model exposure conditions relevant to the AO for an example bronchial compartment of the lung with secretory cell nuclei targets.Results Quantification of AOP KERs highlighted the relevance of radiation types under the stressor-agnostic intent of AOP design, motivating a focus on specific types. For a given type, significant differences of KE response indicate meaningful data to derive linkages from the MIE to the AO is lacking and that better response-response focused studies are required. The MC study estimates the linear energy transfer (LET) of alpha-particles emitted by radon-222 and its progeny in the secretory cell nuclei of the example lung compartment to range from 94−5+5 to 192−18+15 keV/µm.Conclusion Quantifying AOP components provides a means to assemble empirical evidence across different studies. This highlights challenges in the context of studies examining similar endpoints using different radiation types. Data linking KERs to a MIE of ‘deposition of energy’ is shown to be non-compatible with the stressor-agnostic principles of AOP design. Limiting data to that describing response-response relationships between adjacent KERs may better delineate studies relevant to the damage that drives a pathway to the next KE and still support an ‘all hazards’ approach. Such data remains limited and future investigations in the radiation field may consider this approach when designing experiments and reporting their results and outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Radiation BiologySame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207