Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35767729›Full record

ArticleRadiation research2022

Impact of DNA Geometry and Scoring on Monte Carlo Track-Structure Simulations of Initial Radiation-Induced Damage.

Alejandro Bertolet, José Ramos-Méndez, Aimee McNamara, Dohyeon Yoo, Samuel Ingram, Nicholas Henthorn, John-William Warmenhoven, Bruce Faddegon, Michael Merchant, Stephen J McMahon and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. CpG Methylation Protects DNA against Ionizing Radiation.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors.

Alejandro BertoletDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
José Ramos-MéndezDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Aimee McNamaraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Dohyeon YooDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Samuel IngramDivision of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Nicholas HenthornDivision of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
John-William WarmenhovenDivision of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Bruce FaddegonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Michael MerchantDivision of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Stephen J McMahonPatrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Harald PaganettiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jan SchuemannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

TOPAS - nBio, a Monte Carlo tool for radiation biology researchR01CA187003 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI SCHUEMANN, JAN PATRICK OSCAR · 2015 to 2024
$4.8M
The TOPAS Tool for Particle Simulation, a Monte Carlo Simulation Tool for Physics, Biology and Clinical ResearchU24CA215123 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI FADDEGON, BRUCE · 2018 to 2022
$4.2M
Radiation dosimetry for alpha-particle radiopharmaceutical therapy and application to pediatric neuroblastomaK99CA267560 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BERTOLET REINA, ALEJANDRO · 2022 to 2023
$188k
NCI NIH HHS K99 CA267560NCI NIH HHS R01 CA187003NCI NIH HHS U24 CA215123
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Track structure Monte Carlo simulations are a useful tool to investigate the damage induced to DNA by ionizing radiation. These simulations usually rely on simplified geometrical representations of the DNA subcomponents. DNA damage is determined by the physical and physicochemical processes occurring within these volumes. In particular, damage to the DNA backbone is generally assumed to result in strand breaks. DNA damage can be categorized as direct (ionization of an atom part of the DNA molecule) or indirect (damage from reactive chemical species following water radiolysis). We also consider quasi-direct effects, i.e., damage originated by charge transfers after ionization of the hydration shell surrounding the DNA. DNA geometries are needed to account for the damage induced by ionizing radiation, and different geometry models can be used for speed or accuracy reasons. In this work, we use the Monte Carlo track structure tool TOPAS-nBio, built on top of Geant4-DNA, for simulation at the nanometer scale to evaluate differences among three DNA geometrical models in an entire cell nucleus, including a sphere/spheroid model specifically designed for this work. In addition to strand breaks, we explicitly consider the direct, quasi-direct, and indirect damage induced to DNA base moieties. We use results from the literature to determine the best values for the relevant parameters. For example, the proportion of hydroxyl radical reactions between base moieties was 80%, and between backbone, moieties was 20%, the proportion of radical attacks leading to a strand break was 11%, and the expected ratio of base damages and strand breaks was 2.5-3. Our results show that failure to update parameters for new geometric models can lead to significant differences in predicted damage yields.

Indexed as

DNADNA DamageComputer SimulationMonte Carlo MethodRadiation, IonizingDNA

Identifiers

PMID35767729
PMCPMC9458623

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.