ArticleCells2023
Automated Image Analysis of Transmission Electron Micrographs: Nanoscale Evaluation of Radiation-Induced DNA Damage in the Context of Chromatin.
Article in Cells, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodological Landscape of DNA Damage Response Detection: From Conventional Assays to Future Innovations.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Immunoelectron microscopy: a comprehensive guide from sample preparation to high-resolution imaging.Discover nano · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHeavy ion irradiation (IR) with high-linear energy transfer (LET) is characterized by a unique depth dose distribution and increased biological effectiveness. Following high-LET IR, localized energy deposition along the particle trajectories induces clustered DNA lesions, leading to low electron density domains (LEDDs). To investigate the spatiotemporal dynamics of DNA repair and chromatin remodeling, we established the automated image analysis of transmission electron micrographs.
methodsHuman fibroblasts were irradiated with high-LET carbon ions or low-LET photons. At 0.1 h, 0.5 h, 5 h, and 24 h post-IR, nanoparticle-labeled repair factors (53BP1, pKu70, pKu80, DNA-PKcs) were visualized using transmission electron microscopy in interphase nuclei to monitor the formation and repair of DNA damage in the chromatin ultrastructure. Using AI-based software tools, advanced image analysis techniques were established to assess the DNA damage pattern following low-LET versus high-LET IR.
resultsLow-LET IR induced single DNA lesions throughout the nucleus, and most DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) were efficiently rejoined with no visible chromatin decondensation. High-LET IR induced clustered DNA damage concentrated along the particle trajectories, resulting in circumscribed LEDDs. Automated image analysis was used to determine the exact number of differently sized nanoparticles, their distance from one another, and their precise location within the micrographs (based on size, shape, and density). Chromatin densities were determined from grayscale features, and nanoparticles were automatically assigned to euchromatin or heterochromatin. High-LET IR-induced LEDDs were delineated using automated segmentation, and the spatial distribution of nanoparticles in relation to segmented LEDDs was determined.
conclusionsThe results of our image analysis suggest that high-LET IR induces chromatin relaxation along particle trajectories, enabling the critical repair of successive DNA damage. Following exposure to different radiation qualities, automated image analysis of nanoparticle-labeled DNA repair proteins in the chromatin ultrastructure enables precise characterization of specific DNA damage patterns.
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.