MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414345563 · doi:10.1667/rade-25-00032.1

Development of Low Radiation Dose Biomarkers: A Commentary on Whether Non-targeted Effects Need to Be Considered

2025· article· en· W4414345563 on OpenAlexaff
Mothersill Carmel, Colin Seymour

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBystander effectEpigeneticsPopulationGenome instabilityAdaptive responseLow Dose RadiationHormesisIonizing radiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issue of determining likely outcomes after low dose exposure to radiation is complex and controversial. Currently, the linear no-threshold (LNT) model is used to justify the linear extrapolation of (adverse) outcomes from high doses, where effects are clearly seen, to low doses, where effects are very difficult to detect and even more difficult to ascribe to the measured radiation exposure. Among the factors hindering the development of a more precise system are the lack of reliable predictors of system health. While biomarkers indicating the health of individual cells or organisms exist, they fail at low doses due to the complexity of cause-effect relationships and the multiple factors contributing "stress" to the system as a whole (whether "whole" is a whole organism, a population or an ecosystem). Approaches to capture this complexity include adverse outcome pathway (AOP) analysis, which looks at multiple levels of organization from gene to ecosystem. In this commentary, we discuss the role of non-targeted effects (NTE) such as genomic instability and bystander effects. These mechanisms involve transmission of information between different levels of organization. In the case of BE, signals from exposed to unexposed cells or organisms coordinate response at higher levels of organization, permitting population responses to radiation to be identified and, potentially, mitigated. Genomic instability is more complex as it involves not only signaling but also trans-generational transmission of genetic or epigenetic changes and may lead to long-term adaptive evolution. GI may also be involved in memory or legacy effects, which contribute a further component to the dose effect measured in legacy sites. Our recent analysis of the contributions of memory and legacy effects to the total effect using data sets from Chernobyl and Fukushima (voles, birds and butterflies) suggests this type of analysis may help reduce uncertainties over laboratory-to-field extrapolations. A focus on novel but widespread NTE mechanistic pathways may open the way to successful prophylaxis and development of new biomarkers for better risk assessment after low dose exposures.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation ResearchSame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207