Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37808098›Full record

ArticleArXiv2023

Multi-Institutional Audit of FLASH and Conventional Dosimetry with a 3D-Printed Anatomically Realistic Mouse Phantom.

M Ramish Ashraf, Stavros Melemenidis, Kevin Liu, Veljko Grilj, Jeannette Jansen, Brett Velasquez, Luke Connell, Joseph B Schulz, Claude Bailat, Aaron Libed and 15 more

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

M Ramish Ashraf
Stavros Melemenidis
Kevin Liu
Veljko Grilj
Jeannette Jansen
Brett Velasquez
Luke Connell
Joseph B Schulz
Claude Bailat
Aaron Libed
Rakesh Manjappa
Suparna Dutt
Luis Soto
Brianna Lau
Aaron Garza
William Larsen
Lawrie Skinner
Amy S Yu
Murat Surucu
Edward E Graves
Peter G Maxim
Stephen F Kry
Marie-Catherine Vozenin
Emil Schüler
Billy W Loo Jr
Stanford University · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Lausanne · CHUniversity of California, Irvine · US

Funding

Project 4: Mechanistic Basics of FLASH Effect: Role of O2P01CA244091 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI LIMOLI, CHARLES · 2020 to 2024
$9.6M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA244091
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We conducted a multi-institutional audit of dosimetric variability between FLASH and conventional dose rate (CONV) electron irradiations by using an anatomically realistic 3D-printed mouse phantom. A CT scan of a live mouse was used to create a 3D model of bony anatomy, lungs, and soft tissue. A dual-nozzle 3D printer was used to print the mouse phantom using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene ($~1.02 g/cm^3$) and polylactic acid ($~1.24 g/cm^3$) simultaneously to simulate soft tissue and bone densities, respectively. The lungs were printed separately using lightweight polylactic acid ($~0.64 g/cm^3$). Hounsfield units (HU) and densities were compared with the reference CT scan of the live mouse. Print-to-print reproducibility of the phantom was assessed. Three institutions were each provided a phantom, and each institution performed two replicates of irradiations at selected mouse anatomic regions. The average dose difference between FLASH and CONV dose distributions and deviation from the prescribed dose were measured with radiochromic film. Compared to the reference CT scan, CT scans of the phantom demonstrated mass density differences of $0.10 g/cm^3$ for bone, $0.12 g/cm^3$ for lung, and $0.03 g/cm^3$ for soft tissue regions. Between phantoms, the difference in HU for soft tissue and bone was <10 HU from print to print. Lung exhibited the most variation (54 HU) but minimally affected dose distribution (<0.5% dose differences between phantoms). The mean difference between FLASH and CONV from the first replicate to the second decreased from 4.3% to 1.2%, and the mean difference from the prescribed dose decreased from 3.6% to 2.5% for CONV and 6.4% to 2.7% for FLASH. The framework presented here is promising for credentialing of multi-institutional studies of FLASH preclinical research to maximize the reproducibility of biological findings.

Identifiers

PMID37808098
PMCPMC10557797
OpenAlexW4387440799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.