Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39448656›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Interpreting the biological effects of protons as a function of physical quantity: linear energy transfer or microdosimetric lineal energy spectrum?

Fada Guan, Lawrence Bronk, Matthew Kerr, Yuting Li, Leslie A Braby, Mary Sobieski, Xiaochun Wang, Xiaodong Zhang, Clifford Stephan, David R Grosshans and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

11 authors.

Fada Guan *Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
Lawrence Bronk *Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Matthew KerrDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Yuting LiDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Leslie A BrabyDepartment of Nuclear Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77840, USA.
Mary SobieskiCenter for Translational Cancer Research, Texas A&M Health Science Center, Institute of Biosciences and Technology, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Xiaochun WangDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Xiaodong ZhangDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Clifford StephanCenter for Translational Cancer Research, Texas A&M Health Science Center, Institute of Biosciences and Technology, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
David R GrosshansDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. dgrossha@mdanderson.org.
Radhe MohanDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. rmohan@mdanderson.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The choice of appropriate physical quantities to characterize the biological effects of ionizing radiation has evolved over time coupled with advances in scientific understanding. The basic hypothesis in radiation dosimetry is that the energy deposited by ionizing radiation initiates all the consequences of exposure in a biological sample (e.g., DNA damage, reproductive cell death). Physical quantities defined to characterize energy deposition have included dose, a measure of the mean energy imparted per unit mass of the target, and linear energy transfer (LET), a measure of the mean energy deposition per unit distance that charged particles traverse in a medium. The primary advantage of using the "dose and LET" physical system is its relative simplicity, especially for presenting and recording results. Inclusion of additional information such as the energy spectrum of charged particles renders this approach adequate to describe the biological effects of large dose levels from homogeneous sources. The primary disadvantage of this system is that it does not provide a unique description of the stochastic nature of radiation interactions. We and others have used dose-averaged LET (LET

Indexed as

Linear Energy TransferProtonsRelative Biological EffectivenessCell Line, TumorDNA DamageDose-Response Relationship, RadiationHumansRadiometryProtonsLinear energy transfer (LET)Lung cancer cellsMicrodosimetric lineal energy spectrumProton biological effect

Identifiers

PMID39448656
PMCPMC11502811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.