MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391630588 · doi:10.1111/php.13917

Transcriptome analysis in mouse skin after exposure to ultraviolet radiation from a canopy sunbed

2024· article· en· W4391630588 on OpenAlexafffund
Sami S. Qutob, Samantha P. M. Roesch, Sandy Smiley, Pascale V. Bellier, Andrew Williams, Kate B. Cook, Matthew J. Meier, Andrea Rowan‐Carroll, Carole L. Yauk, James P. McNamee

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotochemistry and Photobiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSkin Protection and Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaHealth Canada
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsTranscriptomeSunburnUltraviolet radiationSkin cancerGeneUltravioletUltraviolet B radiationBiologyGene expressionCancer researchPhysiologyChemistryCancerGeneticsMedicineDermatologyOptoelectronicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UV‐R), from both natural and artificial tanning, heightens the risk of skin cancer by inducing molecular changes in cells and tissues. Despite established transcriptional alterations at a molecular level due to UV‐R exposure, uncertainties persist regarding UV radiation characterization and subsequent genomic changes. Our study aimed to mechanistically explore dose‐ and time‐dependent gene expression changes, that may drive short‐term (e.g., sunburn) and long‐term actinic (e.g., skin cancer) consequences. Using C57BL/6N mouse skin, we analyzed transcriptomic expression following exposure to five erythemally weighted UV‐R doses (0, 5, 10, 20, and 40 mJ/cm 2 ) emitted by a UV‐R tanning device. At 96 h post‐exposure, 5 mJ/cm 2 induced 116 statistically significant differentially expressed genes (DEGs) associated with structural changes from UV‐R damage. The highest number of significant gene expression changes occurred at 6 and 48 h post‐exposure in the 20 and 40 mJ/cm 2 dose groups. Notably, at 40 mJ/cm 2 , 13 DEGs related to skin barrier homeostasis were consistently perturbed across all timepoints. UV‐R exposure activated pathways involving oxidative stress, P53 signaling, inflammation, biotransformation, skin barrier maintenance, and innate immunity. This in vivo study's transcriptional data offers mechanistic insights into both short‐term and potential non‐threshold‐dependent long‐term health effects of UV‐R tanning.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotochemistry and PhotobiologySame topicSkin Protection and AgingFrench-language works237,207