ArticleCell proliferation2012
Influence of stem-cell cycle time on accelerated re-population during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer.
Article in Cell proliferation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiobiologically derived biphasic fractionation schemes to overcome the effects of tumour hypoxia.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
- Prolonged radiation time and low nadir hemoglobin during postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy are both poor prognostic factors with synergistic effect on locally advanced head and neck cancer patients.OncoTargets and therapy · 2015Article
- Clinical effectiveness, toxicity, and failure patterns of helical tomotherapy for postoperative oral cavity cancer patients.OncoTargets and therapy · 2014Article
- BlueBerry Isolate, Pterostilbene, Functions as a Potential Anticancer Stem Cell Agent in Suppressing Irradiation-Mediated Enrichment of Hepatoma Stem Cells.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTumour re-population during radiotherapy was identified as an important reason for treatment failure in head and neck cancers. The process of re-population is suggested to be caused by various mechanisms, one of the most plausible one being accelerated division of stem-cells (i.e. drastic shortening of cell cycle duration). However, the literature lacks quantitative data regarding the length of tumour stem-cell cycle time during irradiation. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe presented work suggests that if accelerated stem-cell division is indeed a key mechanism behind tumour re-population, the stem-cell cycle time can drop below 10 h during radiotherapy. To illustrate the possible implications, the mechanism of accelerated division was implemented into a Monte Carlo model of tumour growth and response to radiotherapy. Tumour response to radiotherapy was simulated with different stem-cell cycle times (between 2 and 10 h) after the initiation of radiotherapy.
resultsIt was found that very short stem-cell cycle times lead to tumour re-population during treatment, which cannot be overcome by radiation-induced cell kill. Increasing the number of radiation dose fractions per week might be effective, but only for longer cell cycle times.
conclusionIt is of crucial importance to quantitatively assess the mechanisms responsible for tumour re-population, given that conventional treatment regimens are not efficient in delivering lethal doses to advanced head and neck tumours.
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.