Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37690668›Full record

ArticleRadiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology2023

FLASH-RT does not affect chromosome translocations and junction structures beyond that of CONV-RT dose-rates.

Paul G Barghouth, Stavros Melemenidis, Pierre Montay-Gruel, Jonathan Ollivier, Vignesh Viswanathan, Patrik G Jorge, Luis A Soto, Brianna C Lau, Cheyenne Sadeghi, Anushka Edlabadkar and 15 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. FLASH Radiotherapy: Expectations, Challenges, and Current Knowledge.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Paul G BarghouthDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Stavros MelemenidisDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Pierre Montay-GruelLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2695, USA.
Jonathan OllivierLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland.
Vignesh ViswanathanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Patrik G JorgeInstitute of Radiation Physics/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland.
Luis A SotoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Brianna C LauDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Cheyenne SadeghiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Anushka EdlabadkarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Richard ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2695, USA.
Ning RuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2695, USA.
Janet E BaulchDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2695, USA.
Rakesh ManjappaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Jinghui WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Marie Le BouteillerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Murat SurucuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Amy YuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Karl BushDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Lawrie SkinnerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Peter G MaximDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2695, USA.
Billy W LooDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Charles L LimoliDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2695, USA.
Marie-Catherine VozeninLaboratory of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland.
Richard L FrockDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: frock@stanford.edu.
Stanford University · USUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Lausanne · CHInstitute 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
Postdoctoral Training in the Radiation ScincesT32CA121940 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI GRAVES, EDWARD E. · 2007 to 2018
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA244091NCI NIH HHS T32 CA121940
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeThe impact of radiotherapy (RT) at ultra high vs conventional dose rate (FLASH vs CONV) on the generation and repair of DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) is an important question that remains to be investigated. Here, we tested the hypothesis as to whether FLASH-RT generates decreased chromosomal translocations compared to CONV-RT. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used two FLASH validated electron beams and high-throughput rejoin and genome-wide translocation sequencing (HTGTS-JoinT-seq), employing S. aureus and S. pyogenes Cas9 "bait" DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) in HEK239T cells, to measure differences in bait-proximal repair and their genome-wide translocations to "prey" DSBs generated after various irradiation doses, dose rates and oxygen tensions (normoxic, 21% O

resultsNormoxic and physioxic irradiation of HEK293T cells increased translocations at the cost of decreasing bait-proximal repair but were indistinguishable between CONV-RT and FLASH-RT. Although no apparent increase in chromosome translocations was observed with hypoxia-induced apoptosis, the combined decrease in oxygen tension with IR dose-rate modulation did not reveal significant differences in the level of translocations nor in their junction structures. Furthermore, RT dose rate modality on U87 cells did not change γH2AX foci numbers at 1- and 24-hours post-irradiation nor did this affect 293T clonogenic survival.

conclusionIrrespective of oxygen tension, FLASH-RT produces translocations and junction structures at levels and proportions that are indistinguishable from CONV-RT.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedTranslocation, GeneticDNA RepairDose-Response Relationship, RadiationHEK293 CellsHumansRadiotherapy DosageApoptosisChromosome translocationFLASH-RTHTGTS-JoinT-seqHypoxia

Identifiers

PMID37690668
PMCPMC10591966
OpenAlexW4386575115

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.