Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34395371›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2021

Radiosensitization Effect of Gold Nanoparticles in Proton Therapy.

Charnay Cunningham, Maryna de Kock, Monique Engelbrecht, Xanthene Miles, Jacobus Slabbert, Charlot Vandevoorde

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Polyacrylic Acid-Coated LaBPharmaceutics · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Microdosimetric Simulation of Gold-Nanoparticle-Enhanced Radiotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Charnay CunninghamRadiation Biophysics Division, Nuclear Medicine Department, iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Cape Town, South Africa.
Maryna de KockDepartment of Medical Biosciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
Monique EngelbrechtRadiation Biophysics Division, Nuclear Medicine Department, iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Cape Town, South Africa.
Xanthene MilesRadiation Biophysics Division, Nuclear Medicine Department, iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Cape Town, South Africa.
Jacobus SlabbertRadiation Biophysics Division, Nuclear Medicine Department, iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Cape Town, South Africa.
Charlot VandevoordeRadiation Biophysics Division, Nuclear Medicine Department, iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Cape Town, South Africa.
National Research Foundation · ZAUniversity of the Western Cape · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of proton therapy facilities and the clinical usage of high energy proton beams for cancer treatment has substantially increased over the last decade. This is mainly due to the superior dose distribution of proton beams resulting in a reduction of side effects and a lower integral dose compared to conventional X-ray radiotherapy. More recently, the usage of metallic nanoparticles as radiosensitizers to enhance radiotherapy is receiving growing attention. While this strategy was originally intended for X-ray radiotherapy, there is currently a small number of experimental studies indicating promising results for proton therapy. However, most of these studies used low proton energies, which are less applicable to clinical practice; and very small gold nanoparticles (AuNPs). Therefore, this proof of principle study evaluates the radiosensitization effect of larger AuNPs in combination with a 200 MeV proton beam. CHO-K1 cells were exposed to a concentration of 10 μg/ml of 50 nm AuNPs for 4 hours before irradiation with a clinical proton beam at NRF iThemba LABS. AuNP internalization was confirmed by inductively coupled mass spectrometry and transmission electron microscopy, showing a random distribution of AuNPs throughout the cytoplasm of the cells and even some close localization to the nuclear membrane. The combined exposure to AuNPs and protons resulted in an increase in cell killing, which was 27.1% at 2 Gy and 43.8% at 6 Gy, compared to proton irradiation alone, illustrating the radiosensitizing potential of AuNPs. Additionally, cells were irradiated at different positions along the proton depth-dose curve to investigate the LET-dependence of AuNP radiosensitization. An increase in cytogenetic damage was observed at all depths for the combined treatment compared to protons alone, but no incremental increase with LET could be determined. In conclusion, this study confirms the potential of 50 nm AuNPs to increase the therapeutic efficacy of proton therapy.

Indexed as

Metal NanoparticlesProton TherapyRadiation-Sensitizing AgentsGoldHumansMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionGoldRadiation-Sensitizing Agentsdose enhancement effectsgold nanoparticles (AuNPs)nanomedicineparticle therapyproton therapyradiation therapyradiosensitization effect

Identifiers

PMID34395371
PMCPMC8358148
OpenAlexW2792906045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.