Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41667535›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Pan centromeric FISH enhances precision in radiation biodosimetry.

Rajesh Kumar Chaurasia, Aarti Notnani, Devina Fenilon Vaz, Kapil B Shirsath, Sheeri Fatima, Nagesh N Bhat, Arshad Khan, Dhruv Kumar, Balvinder K Sapra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Rajesh Kumar ChaurasiaRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India.
Aarti NotnaniRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India.
Devina Fenilon VazRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India.
Kapil B ShirsathRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India.
Sheeri FatimaSchool of Health Sciences and Technology, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, India.
Nagesh N BhatRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India. nageshnb@barc.gov.in.
Arshad KhanRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India.
Dhruv KumarSchool of Health Sciences and Technology, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, India.
Balvinder K SapraRadiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate biodosimetry is critical for assessing radiation exposure in radiological emergencies, occupational monitoring, and clinical management, where precise dose estimation informs life-saving decisions and regulatory compliance. Current gold-standard cytogenetic methods face limitations in sensitivity and reproducibility, especially at low doses (< 0.5 Gy) (practical limitations at low doses, including very low dicentric yields, higher statistical noise, and greater scoring uncertainty as aberration frequencies near background levels). This study presents a systematic comparison of pan-centromeric fluorescence in situ hybridization (pan-cent-FISH) and Giemsa staining for detecting dicentric (DC) and ring (R) chromosomes following 60Co-γ irradiation (0–3 Gy). Analysis of more than 15,000 metaphases per technique revealed enhanced sensitivity of pan-cent-FISH technique, demonstrating a 1.72-fold higher linear coefficient and enhanced (1.13-fold) quadratic coefficient (β), indicating improved sensitivity across both low and high dose ranges. Blind validation with eight samples showed pan-cent-FISH achieved ~ 2-fold greater accuracy, with mean absolute differences of 0.0538 Gy (vs. 0.1105 Gy for Giemsa) and average relative errors of 7.13% (vs. 15.35% for Giemsa). At low doses (0.1 Gy), pan-cent-FISH maintained 9.0% error, while Giemsa exceeded acceptable limits (21.0% error). The standardized fluorescence detection used for the technique eliminated morphological ambiguities, reducing false negatives by ~ 40% and improving first-pass accuracy.

Indexed as

CentromereIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceRadiation MonitoringRadiometryChromosome AberrationsDose-Response Relationship, RadiationGamma RaysHumansRadiation DosageReproducibility of ResultsBiodosimetryChromosomal aberrationsCytogenetic biodosimetryDose-response curvesPan-centromeric FISHRadiological emergencies

Identifiers

PMID41667535
PMCPMC12957484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.