ArticleJournal of radiation research2024
Evaluation of relative biological effectiveness for diseases of the circulatory system based on microdosimetry.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Biological effects of high-LET irradiation on the circulatory system.International journal of radiation biology · 2025Pooled it
- Inverse dose protraction effects of high-LET radiation: Evidence and significance.Mutation research. Reviews in mutation researchReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the next decade, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) will issue the next set of general recommendations, for which evaluation of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for various types of tissue reactions would be needed. ICRP has recently classified diseases of the circulatory system (DCS) as a tissue reaction, but has not recommended RBE for DCS. We therefore evaluated the mean and uncertainty of RBE for DCS by applying a microdosimetric kinetic model specialized for RBE estimation of tissue reactions. For this purpose, we analyzed several RBE data for DCS determined by past animal experiments and evaluated the radius of the subnuclear domain best fit to each experiment as a single free parameter included in the model. Our analysis suggested that RBE for DCS tends to be lower than that for skin reactions, and their difference was borderline significant due to large variances of the evaluated parameters. We also found that RBE for DCS following mono-energetic neutron irradiation of the human body is much lower than that for skin reactions, particularly at the thermal energy and around 1 MeV. This tendency is considered attributable not only to the intrinsic difference of neutron RBE between skin reactions and DCS but also to the difference in the contributions of secondary γ-rays to the total absorbed doses between their target organs. These findings will help determine RBE by ICRP for preventing tissue reactions.
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.