ReviewRadiation and environmental biophysics2009
Sex-specific aspects of tumor therapy.
Review in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intracellular lymphocyte protein biomarkers for early radiological triage in the human population.PloS one · 2025Article
- Prognostic value of the micronucleus assay for clinical endpoints in neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Quantitative analysis of ATM phosphorylation in lymphocytes.DNA repair · 2019Article
- Sex as a Biological Variable in Research: the New Policy of Balkan Medical JournalBalkan medical journal · 2018Article
- Evolutionarily conserved serum microRNAs predict radiation-induced fatality in nonhuman primates.Science translational medicine · 2017Article
- Flow cytometry-assisted quantification of γH2AX expression has potential as a rapid high-throughput biodosimetry tool.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 2016Article
- Genetic and epigenetic underpinnings of sex differences in the brain and in neurological and psychiatric disease susceptibility.Progress in brain research · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is increasing evidence that sex-specific differences in toxicity profiles and outcome after radiotherapy are accumulating in medical oncology, and that treatment strategies may require some modification. Furthermore, sex-specific differences in the sensitivity to genotoxic and therapeutical agents are also of general concern for risk estimation. This review is focussed on the specific influence of sex on these endpoints covering both a clinical and a biological point of view. In this paper, the literature was systematically reviewed with respect to sex-specific differences in tumor and normal tissue sensitivity after exposure to ionizing radiation, as well as to the relevant underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms. Although a number of data on sex-specific differences are available and remarkable differences on clinical, molecular, and cellular levels have been reported, a firm conclusion on any existing sex-specific differences is not yet possible. Future studies are required and should be focussed on this aspect of individual radiosensitivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19242712What 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.