Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30731186›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2019

Using the Proton Energy Spectrum and Microdosimetry to Model Proton Relative Biological Effectiveness.

Mark Newpower, Darshana Patel, Lawrence Bronk, Fada Guan, Pankaj Chaudhary, Stephen J McMahon, Kevin M Prise, Giuseppe Schettino, David R Grosshans, Radhe Mohan

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. NRG Oncology White Paper on the Relative Biological Effectiveness in Proton Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mark NewpowerDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Medical Physics Program, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: manewpower@mdanderson.org.
Darshana PatelDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Lawrence BronkDepartment of Experimental Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Fada GuanDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Pankaj ChaudharyCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Stephen J McMahonCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Kevin M PriseCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Giuseppe SchettinoNational Physical Laboratory, Hampton Road, Teddington, Middlesex, United Kingdom; University of Surrey, Department of Physics, Guilford, United Kingdom.
David R GrosshansDepartment of Experimental Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Radhe MohanDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USQueen's University Belfast · GBUniversity of Surrey · GB

Funding

MDACC Clinical and Research Physics SupportU19CA021239 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI MOHAN, RADHE · 2014 to 2018
$11.2M
NCI NIH HHS U19 CA021239
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe introduce a methodology to calculate the microdosimetric quantity dose-mean lineal energy for input into the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) to model the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of proton irradiation experiments. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The data from 7 individual proton RBE experiments were included in this study. In each experiment, the RBE at several points along the Bragg curve was measured. Monte Carlo simulations to calculate the lineal energy probability density function of 172 different proton energies were carried out with use of Geant4 DNA. We calculated the fluence-weighted lineal energy probability density function (f

resultsBoth the MKM and LET

conclusionsOur 3 key accomplishments include the following: (1) We developed a method that uses the proton energy spectra and lineal energy distributions of those protons to calculate dose-mean lineal energy. (2) We demonstrated that our application of the MKM provides theoretical validation of proton irradiation experiments that show that RBE is significantly greater than 1.1. (3) We showed that there is no clear evidence that the MKM is better than LET

Indexed as

Linear Energy TransferProtonsProton TherapyRelative Biological EffectivenessMonte Carlo MethodRadiotherapy DosageProtons

Identifiers

PMID30731186
PMCPMC6499683
OpenAlexW2912071408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.