ReviewFrontiers in oncology2022
National Effort to Re-Establish Heavy Ion Cancer Therapy in the United States.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Monte Carlo calculations of target fragments from helium and carbon ion interactions with water.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Article
- The rationale for a carbon ion radiation therapy facility in Australia.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2024Review
- Effect of Linear Energy Transfer on Cystamine's Radioprotective Activity: A Study Using the Fricke Dosimeter with 6-500 MeV per Nucleon Carbon Ions-Implication for Carbon Ion Hadrontherapy.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Dosimetric comparison between stereotactic body radiotherapy and carbon-ion radiation therapy for prostate cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review, we attempt to make a case for the establishment of a limited number of heavy ion cancer research and treatment facilities in the United States. Based on the basic physics and biology research, conducted largely in Japan and Germany, and early phase clinical trials involving a relatively small number of patients, we believe that heavy ions have a considerably greater potential to enhance the therapeutic ratio for many cancer types compared to conventional X-ray and proton radiotherapy. Moreover, with ongoing technological developments and with research in physical, biological, immunological, and clinical aspects, it is quite plausible that cost effectiveness of radiotherapy with heavier ions can be substantially improved.
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.