ReviewMedical physics2019
Laser-driven radiation: Biomarkers for molecular imaging of high dose-rate effects.
Review in Medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-lived coherences for the observation of oxidation kinetics on different timescales by NMR.Communications chemistry · 2026Article
- Interplay Between Key Molecular Signaling Pathways and Immune Players Following Brain Irradiation.Mediators of inflammation · 2025Review
- Changes in Telomere Length in Leukocytes and Leukemic Cells after Ultrashort Electron Beam Radiation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Theranostic applications of selenium nanomedicines against lung cancer.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2023Review
- Challenges and Advances in the Application of Dynamic Nuclear Polarization to Liquid-State NMR Spectroscopy.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2021Review
- Magnetization Lifetimes Prediction and Measurements Using Long-Lived Spin States in Endogenous Molecules.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently developed short-pulsed laser sources garner high dose-rate beams such as energetic ions and electrons, x rays, and gamma rays. The biological effects of laser-generated ion beams observed in recent studies are different from those triggered by radiation generated using classical accelerators or sources, and this difference can be used to develop new strategies for cancer radiotherapy. High-power lasers can now deliver particles in doses of up to several Gy within nanoseconds. The fast interaction of laser-generated particles with cells alters cell viability via distinct molecular pathways compared to traditional, prolonged radiation exposure. The emerging consensus of recent literature is that the differences are due to the timescales on which reactive molecules are generated and persist, in various forms. Suitable molecular markers have to be adopted to monitor radiation effects, addressing relevant endogenous molecules that are accessible for investigation by noninvasive procedures and enable translation to clinical imaging. High sensitivity has to be attained for imaging molecular biomarkers in cells and in vivo to follow radiation-induced functional changes. Signal-enhanced MRI biomarkers enriched with stable magnetic nuclear isotopes can be used to monitor radiation effects, as demonstrated recently by the use of dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP) for biomolecular observations in vivo. In this context, nanoparticles can also be used as radiation enhancers or biomarker carriers. The radiobiology-relevant features of high dose-rate secondary radiation generated using high-power lasers and the importance of noninvasive biomarkers for real-time monitoring the biological effects of radiation early on during radiation pulse sequences are discussed.
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.