Deuterated water (2H2O, heavy water) labelling to investigate human cell dynamics in vivo - lessons in protocol design and toxicity from the current literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of deuterated water (also known as ‘heavy water’) as a tracer to measure human in vivo cell proliferation rates for specific cell subsets has expanded significantly in recent years. Although there have been several published methods papers, investigators developing new applications may be confused by differences in study design and deuterated water dose/duration. Furthermore, this approach may be met with regulatory difficulties and participant concerns about toxicity. This scoping review explores lessons that can be learnt from the current literature on the use of deuterated water in human in vivo studies measuring cell proliferation. We identified 29 such studies involving 535 study participants, both healthy volunteers and those with specific clinical conditions. Wide variations in protocols were noted with doses ranging from 40-100 ml/day of pure deuterated water (or equivalent) and durations from 4-12 weeks. Study design usually reflected the kinetics of the cell of interest. No clinical toxicity signals were noted in any studies although four studies did report transient dizziness, a recognized symptom of changing water density. These published studies provide a strong safety signal for potential participants and regulatory authorities and can act as templates for the development of new research applications.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".