ArticleCommunications biology2022
A computational approach to quantifying miscounting of radiation-induced double-strand break immunofluorescent foci.
Article in Communications biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular and Cellular Effects of CT Scans in Human Adipose Mesenchymal Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Early and Late Effects of Low-Dose X-ray Exposure in Human Fibroblasts: DNA Repair Foci, Proliferation, Autophagy, and Senescence.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks in cortisol exposed fibroblasts as quantified with the novel foci-integrated damage complexity score (FIDCS).Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Immunofluorescent tagging of DNA double-strand break (DSB) markers, such as γ-H2AX and other DSB repair proteins, are powerful tools in understanding biological consequences following irradiation. However, whilst the technique is widespread, there are many uncertainties related to its ability to resolve and reliably deduce the number of foci when counting using microscopy. We present a new tool for simulating radiation-induced foci in order to evaluate microscope performance within in silico immunofluorescent images. Simulations of the DSB distributions were generated using Monte Carlo track-structure simulation. For each DSB distribution, a corresponding DNA repair process was modelled and the un-repaired DSBs were recorded at several time points. Corresponding microscopy images for both a DSB and (γ-H2AX) fluorescent marker were generated and compared for different microscopes, radiation types and doses. Statistically significant differences in miscounting were found across most of the tested scenarios. These inconsistencies were propagated through to repair kinetics where there was a perceived change between radiation-types. These changes did not reflect the underlying repair rate and were caused by inconsistencies in foci counting. We conclude that these underlying uncertainties must be considered when analysing images of DNA damage markers to ensure differences observed are real and are not caused by non-systematic miscounting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.