Interlaboratory comparison of high-throughput protein biomarker assay quantifications for radiation exposure classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the event of a widespread radiological incident, thousands of individuals will require rapid assessment of exposure using validated biodosimetry assays to inform clinical triage. In this scenario, multiple biodosimetry laboratories may be necessary for large-volume sample processing. To meet this need, we have developed a high-throughput assay for the rapid measurement of intracellular protein biomarkers in human peripheral blood samples using an Imaging Flow Cytometry (IFC) platform. The objective of this work was to harmonize and validate the reproducibility of our blood biomarker assay for radiation exposure across three IFC instruments, two located at Columbia University (CU) and the third at Health Canada. The Center for Radiological Research (CRR) at CU served as the central laboratory and reference instrument, where samples were prepared in triplicate, labeled with two radiation responsive leukocyte biomarkers (BAX and phosphor-p53 (Ser37)), and distributed for simultaneous interrogation by each IFC. Initial tests showed that significantly different baseline biomarker measurements were generated on each instrument when using the same acquisition settings, suggesting that harmonization of signal intensities is necessary. Subsequent tests harmonized biomarker measurements after irradiation by modulating laser intensity using two reference materials: unstained samples and standardized rainbow beads. Both methods generated measurements on each instrument without significant differences between the new and references instruments, allowing for the use of one master template to quantify biomarker expression across multiple instruments. Deming regression analyses of 0-5 Gy dose-response curves showed overall good correlation of BAX and p53 values across new and reference instruments. While Bland-Altman analyses indicated low to moderate instrument biases, ROC Curve analyses ultimately show successful discrimination between exposed and unexposed samples on each instrument (AUC values > 0.85).
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 | 0.038 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".