Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33348373›Full record

ArticleRadiation research2020

Maintenance of Tight Junction Integrity in the Absence of Vascular Dilation in the Brain of Mice Exposed to Ultra-High-Dose-Rate FLASH Irradiation.

Barrett D Allen, Munjal M Acharya, Pierre Montay-Gruel, Patrik Goncalves Jorge, Claude Bailat, Benoît Petit, Marie-Catherine Vozenin, Charles Limoli

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The current status of FLASH particle therapy: a systematic review.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Reduced corneal toxicity following whole brain irradiation in mice.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Microenvironmental remodeling in FLASH radiotherapy.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Barrett D AllenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California 92697-2695.
Munjal M AcharyaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California 92697-2695.
Pierre Montay-GruelLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Patrik Goncalves JorgeLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Claude BailatInstitute of Radiation Physics/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Benoît PetitLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Marie-Catherine VozeninLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Charles LimoliDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California 92697-2695.
University of Lausanne · CHUniversity of California, Irvine · USInstitute of Radiation Physics

Funding

Project 4: Mechanistic Basics of FLASH Effect: Role of O2P01CA244091 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI LIMOLI, CHARLES · 2020 to 2024
$9.6M
Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR001416 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI CAIOZZO, VINCENT JAMES, DEMETRIOU, MICHAEL · 2015 to 2023
$5.6M
Mechanisms underlying radiation-and chemotherapy induced cognitive impairment.R01NS089575 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI LIMOLI, CHARLES · 2015 to 2020
$2.8M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001416NCI NIH HHS P01 CA244091NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS089575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Persistent vasculature abnormalities contribute to an altered CNS microenvironment that further compromises the integrity of the blood-brain barrier and exposes the brain to a host of neurotoxic conditions. Standard radiation therapy at conventional (CONV) dose rate elicits short-term damage to the blood-brain barrier by disrupting supportive cells, vasculature volume and tight junction proteins. While current clinical applications of cranial radiotherapy use dose fractionation to reduce normal tissue damage, these treatments still cause significant complications. While dose escalation enhances treatment of radiation-resistant tumors, methods to subvert normal tissue damage are clearly needed. In this regard, we have recently developed a new modality of irradiation based on the use of ultra-high-dose-rate FLASH that does not induce the classical pathogenic patterns caused by CONV irradiation. In previous work, we optimized the physical parameters required to minimize normal brain toxicity (i.e., FLASH, instantaneous intra-pulse dose rate, 6.9 · 106 Gy/s, at a mean dose rate of 2,500 Gy/s), which we then used in the current study to determine the effect of FLASH on the integrity of the vasculature and the blood-brain barrier. Both early (24 h, one week) and late (one month) timepoints postirradiation were investigated using C57Bl/6J female mice exposed to whole-brain irradiation delivered in single doses of 25 Gy and 10 Gy, respectively, using CONV (0.09 Gy/s) or FLASH (>106 Gy/s). While the majority of changes found one day postirradiation were minimal, FLASH was found to reduce levels of apoptosis in the neurogenic regions of the brain at this time. At one week and one month postirradiation, CONV was found to induce vascular dilation, a well described sign of vascular alteration, while FLASH minimized these effects. These results were positively correlated with and temporally coincident to changes in the immunostaining of the vasodilator eNOS colocalized to the vasculature, suggestive of possible dysregulation in blood flow at these latter times. Overall expression of the tight junction proteins, occludin and claudin-5, which was significantly reduced after CONV irradiation, remained unchanged in the FLASH-irradiated brains at one and four weeks postirradiation. Our data further confirm that, compared to isodoses of CONV irradiation known to elicit detrimental effects, FLASH does not damage the normal vasculature. These data now provide the first evidence that FLASH preserves microvasculature integrity in the brain, which may prove beneficial to cognition while allowing for better tumor control in the clinic.

Indexed as

AnimalsApoptosisEnzyme InductionFemaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMicrovesselsNitric Oxide Synthase Type IIIRadiotherapyTight JunctionsVasodilationNitric Oxide Synthase Type III

Identifiers

PMID33348373
PMCPMC7773228
OpenAlexW3116351748

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.