The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2311.05671 · v1 · pith:BZIPF3XO · submitted 2023-11-09 · physics.med-ph

Comparative analysis of the yields of dicentrics and chromosomal translocations

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:BZIPF3XOrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification physics.med-ph
keywords analysisdicentricstranslocationsaberrationschromosomaldosesmethodscoring
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Purpose: Chromosomal dicentrics and translocations are commonly employed as biomarkers to estimate radiation doses. The main goal of this article is to perform a comparative analysis of yields of both types of aberrations. The objective is to determine if there are relevant distinctions between both yields, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of their respective suitability and accuracy in the estimation of radiation doses. Materials and Methods: The analysis involved data from a partial-radiation simulation study with the calibration data obtained through two scoring methods: conventional and PAINT modified. Subsequently, a Bayesian bivariate zero-inflated Poisson model was employed to compare the posterior marginal density of the mean of dicentrics and translocations and assess the differences between them. Results: When employing the conventional method of scoring, the findings indicate that there is no notable disparity between the yield of observed translocations and dicentrics. However, when utilizing the PAINT modified method, a notable discrepancy is observed for higher doses, indicating a relevant difference in the mean number of the two types aberrations. Conclusions: The choice of scoring method significantly influences the analysis of radiation-induced aberrations, especially when distinguishing between complex and simple chromosomal formations. Further research and analysis are necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the factors and mechanisms impacting the formation of dicentrics and translocations.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.