MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385799128 · doi:10.1159/000533488

Comparison of Isolated Lymphocyte and Whole Blood-Based CBMN Assays for Radiation Triage

2023· article· en· W4385799128 on OpenAlexaffabout
Antonella Bertucci, Ruth C. Wilkins, S. Lachapelle, Helen C. Turner, David J. Brenner, Guy Garty

Bibliographic record

VenueCytogenetic and Genome Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsBiodosimetryMicronucleus testIonizing radiationMicronucleusDicentric chromosomeBiologyPeripheral blood lymphocytePeripheral bloodNuclear medicineDosimetryWhole bloodToxicologyAndrologyMedicineImmunologyIrradiationInternal medicineGeneticsToxicityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following a mass-casualty nuclear/radiological event, there will be an important need for rapid and accurate estimation of absorbed dose for biological triage. The cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay is an established and validated cytogenetic biomarker used to assess DNA damage in irradiated peripheral blood lymphocytes. Here, we describe an intercomparison experiment between two biodosimetry laboratories, located at Columbia University (CU) and Health Canada (HC) that performed different variants of the human blood CBMN assay to reconstruct dose in human blood, with CU performing the assay on isolated lymphocytes and using semi-automated scoring whereas HC used the more conventional whole blood assay. Although the micronucleus yields varied significantly between the two assays, the predicted doses closely matched up to 4 Gy - the range from which the HC calibration curve was previously established. These results highlight the importance of a robust calibration curve(s) across a wide age range of donors that match the exposure scenario as closely as possible and that will account for differences in methodology between laboratories. We have seen that at low doses, variability in the results may be attributed to variation in the processing while at higher doses the variation is dominated by inter-individual variation in cell proliferation. This interlaboratory collaboration further highlights the usefulness of the CBMN endpoint to accurately reconstruct absorbed dose in human blood after ionizing radiation exposure.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCytogenetic and Genome ResearchSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207