MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416780866 · doi:10.1111/php.70044

Direct evidence of singlet molecular oxygen [O <sub>2</sub> ( <scp> <sup>1</sup> Δg </scp> )] production from <scp>UVA</scp> excited 6‐thioguanine

2025· article· en· W4416780866 on OpenAlexaff
André Lopes, Fernanda M. Prado, Helena C. Junqueira, Marisa Helena Gennari de Medeiros, Graziella E. Ronsein, Jean Cadet, Paolo Di Mascio

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotochemistry and Photobiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoPro-Reitoria de Pesquisa, Universidade de São PauloCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloJohn Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation
KeywordsPhotoexcitationAbsorbanceQuantum yieldSinglet oxygenQuenching (fluorescence)Excited stateGuanineYield (engineering)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract 6‐Thioguanine (6‐TGua) is one of the thiopurines used as a cytostatic drug. When internalized by cells, 6‐TGua is metabolized through the purine salvage pathway and readily incorporated into DNA. Patients treated with these thiopurines are more prone to develop squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. The absorbance spectrum of 6‐TGua, in contrast to guanine (Gua) or any other canonical base, has a maximum absorbance at 342 nm. Therefore, 6‐TGua undergoes photoexcitation upon exposure to UVA radiation, with maximum absorption at 340 nm. In this study, the used approach unequivocally demonstrates the generation and quenching of 1 O 2 by 6‐TGua via the direct spectroscopic detection of 1 O 2 monomol light emission at 1270 nm. Chemiluminescence‐based methods were employed for the determination of the 1 O 2 generation quantum yield (Φ 1 O 2 ) and the total 1 O 2 quenching rate constant (k t ). For the 1 O 2 quantum yield, we found values of 0.22 ± 0.03 for 6‐TGua and 0.12 ± 0.03 for 2′‐deoxy‐6‐thioguanosine (6‐TdGuo). These compounds presented k t values of 1.5 × 10 7 L mol −1 s −1 and 1.1 × 10 7 L mol −1 s −1 , respectively. Through the comparison of these values with the ones obtained for 2′‐deoxyguanosine (dGuo) and its oxidation product 8‐oxo‐7,8‐dihydro‐2′‐deoxyguanosine (8‐oxodGuo), we aim to provide new insights into the 6‐TGua‐containing DNA (DNA‐6‐TGua) reactivity towards 1 O 2 in a biological context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venuePhotochemistry and PhotobiologySame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207