Understanding radiation response and cell cycle variation in brain tumour cells using Raman spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
/S boundary prior to radiation exposure. Here we evaluated whether Raman spectroscopy, combined with cell cycle analysis and DNA damage and repair analysis (γ-H2AX assay), could discriminate the subtle cellular changes associated with radiation response. Raman spectroscopy combined with principal component analysis (PCA) was able to show the changes in radiation response over 24 hours following radiation exposure. Spectral changes were assigned to variations in protein, specifically changes in protein signals from amides as well as changes in lipid expression. A different response was observed between cells synchronised in the cell cycle and unsynchronised cells. After 24 hours following irradiation, the unsynchronised cells showed greater spectral changes compared to the synchronised cells demonstrating that the cell cycle plays an important role in the radiation resistance or sensitivity of the UVW cells, and that radiation resistance could be induced by controlling the cell cycle. One of the main aims of cancer treatment is to stop the proliferation of cells by controlling or halting progression through the cell cycle, thereby highlighting the importance of controlling the cell cycle when studying the effects of cancer treatments such as radiation therapy. Raman spectroscopy has been shown to be a useful tool for evaluating the changes in radiation response when the cell cycle phase is controlled and therefore highlighting its potential for assessing radiation response and resistance.
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 | 0.001 | 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".