ArticleCommunications medicine2026
Identifying predictive hematological biomarkers for radiation exposure by machine learning in mouse models.
Article in Communications medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPopulation-scale radiation exposure assessment during radiological emergencies is hindered by the slow and costly nature of current methods, creating a need for rapid, affordable screening tools. Radiation biodosimetry using peripheral blood counts is a promising approach, but estimating low-dose exposures and exposure at extended time points remains challenging, especially when accounting for inter-individual differences in radiation sensitivity.
methodsWe analyze complete blood count (CBC) profiles from a retrospective cohort of 1151 male and female BALB/cJ and C57BL/6 J mice exposed to total-body X-ray radiation at doses ranging from 0.05 to 4 Gy. CBCs are collected 1 to 150 days post exposure. We develop a predictive model of radiation exposure using a sparse representation learning strategy to identify the most informative CBC parameters. Model performance is evaluated through exhaustive cross-validation and validated in a double-blind prospective cohort of 431 animals. To evaluate robustness in a genetically diverse population, we further test the model on CBC data from a Collaborative Cross (CC) cohort of 1720 animals representing 35 CC strains, 24 h and 28 days after sham or 1 Gy total-body X-ray exposure.
resultsExhaustive cross-validation shows good performance of the Sparse CBC model, with AUC, accuracy and sensitivity exceeding 80%. Similar performance is observed in the prospective cohort. In the CC cohort, performance is modest. Importantly, model performance varies across CC strains, suggesting that host genetic background significantly influences predictive accuracy.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that the Sparse CBC model effectively leverages CBC data to estimate radiation exposure across multiple mouse cohorts, including genetically diverse CC populations. While CBC-based predictions provide a complementary tool for exposure assessment, model performance varies with genetic backgrounds.
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.