Image- and Fluorescence-Based Test Shows Oxidant-Dependent Damages in Red Blood Cells and Enables Screening of Potential Protective Molecules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increase of oxygen saturation within blood bags and metabolic dysregulation occur during storage of red blood cells (RBCs). It leads to the gradual exhaustion of RBC antioxidant protective system and, consequently, to a deleterious state of oxidative stress that plays a major role in the apparition of the so-called storage lesions. The present study describes the use of a test (called TSOX) based on fluorescence and label-free morphology readouts to simply and quickly evaluate the oxidant and antioxidant properties of various compounds in controlled conditions. Here, TSOX was applied to RBCs treated with four antioxidants (ascorbic acid, uric acid, trolox and resveratrol) and three oxidants (AAPH, diamide and H2O2) at different concentrations. Two complementary readouts were chosen: first, where ROS generation was quantified using DCFH-DA fluorescent probe, and second, based on digital holographic microscopy that measures morphology alterations. All oxidants produced an increase of fluorescence, whereas H2O2 did not visibly impact the RBC morphology. Significant protection was observed in three out of four of the added molecules. Of note, resveratrol induced diamond-shape “Tirocytes”. The assay design was selected to be flexible, as well as compatible with high-throughput screening. In future experiments, the TSOX will serve to screen chemical libraries and probe molecules that could be added to the additive solution for RBCs storage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".