ReviewClinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))2021
Review of Conventional and High Dose Rate Brain Radiation (FLASH): Neurobehavioural, Neurocognitive and Assessment Issues in Rodent Models.
Review in Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impacts of FLASH Radiation Therapy and Conventional Radiation Therapy on the Cognitive Abilities of Mice.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Anesthesia is a potent determinant of ultra-high dose rate sparing in the murine total abdominal irradiation model.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Effects of UHDR and Conventional Irradiation on Behavioral and Cognitive Performance and the Percentage of Ly6G+ CD45+ Cells in the Hippocampus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- The Future of Radioactive Medicine.Radiation research · 2023Review
- It is beneficial to invest resources to implement proton intracranial SRS.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Article
- Comparison of Gonadal Toxicity of Single-Fraction Ultra-High Dose Rate and Conventional Radiation in Mice.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Ionising radiation causes secondary tumours and/or enduring cognitive deficits, especially in children. Proton radiotherapy reduces exposure of the developing brain in children but may still cause some lasting effects. Recent observations show that ultra-high dose rate radiation treatment (≥40 Gy/s), called the FLASH effect, is equally effective at tumour control but less damaging to surrounding tissue compared with conventional dose rate protons (0.03-3 Gy/s). Most studies on the FLASH effect in brain and other tissues with different radiation modalities (electron and photon radiation), show FLASH benefits in these preclinical rodent models, but the data are limited, especially for proton FLASH, including for dose, dose rate and neurochemical and neurobehavioural outcomes. Tests of neurocognitive outcomes have been limited despite clinical evidence that this is the area of greatest concern. The FLASH effect in the context of proton exposure is promising, but a more systematic and comprehensive approach to outcomes is needed.
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.