ArticleScientific reports2025
Responses of the carotid artery to acute, fractionated or chronic ionizing irradiation, and differences from the aorta.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 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
- Risk of mortality from diseases of the circulatory system due to occupational chronic radiation exposure, considering the radiation dose rate.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Mesenchymal stem cell implantation mitigates ionizing radiation-induced vascular damage in the murine aorta.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prevalence of Manifestations of Afferent Baroreflex Failure Among Long-Term Survivors of Oropharyngeal Cancer.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Inverse dose protraction effects of low-LET radiation: Evidence and significance.Mutation research. Reviews in mutation researchReview
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The circulatory system receives ionizing radiation at various dose rates. Given mounting epidemiological evidence of elevated radiation risks for diseases of the circulatory system (DCS), the International Commission on Radiological Protection recently recommended the first ever dose threshold for DCS. However, very little knowledge exists about whether radiation effects differ with dose rates and among tissues of the circulatory system. Here, we investigated the impact of dose rates in the carotid artery (CA) and compared it with the aorta. CA was obtained from mice irradiated with the same total dose that was delivered either acutely, 25 fractions, 100 fractions or chronically. CA underwent immunofluorescence and histochemistry staining. Irradiation led to vascular damage, inflammation and fibrosis in CA. The integrative analysis for 14 prelesional endpoints revealed that the magnitude of carotid changes was greater in 25 fractions, smaller in 100 fractions, and much smaller in chronic irradiation, compared with acute irradiation. Radiation responses of the aorta were qualitatively similar to, but quantitatively greater than those of CA. Irradiation causes sparing and enhancing dose protraction effects in a manner that is not a simple function of dose rate, and that radiosensitivity varies within the circulatory system.
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.