ArticleScientific reports2025
Effects of whole brain proton irradiation at conventional or ultra-high dose rate (FLASH), in adult male Sprague Dawley rats.
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 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harnessing the sparing effect of FLASH-RT: From phenomenon observation, radiophysical determinants to molecular mechanisms and synergistic strategies.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Six-month evaluation of normal mouse brain side effects: Comparing FLASH and conventional proton partial brain irradiation.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Conditional sparing in FLASH radiotherapy: Conformal dosimetry and ALARA remain essential.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Review
- Early microglial activation in the TME enables FLASH-RT to eradicate medulloblastoma while promoting neuron-astrocyte crosstalk to minimize toxicity in the hippocampus.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Commissioning of a gantry-mounted synchrocyclotron for preclinical FLASH studies utilizing spread-out Bragg peaks.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Innovative radiotherapies for the treatment of glioblastoma.Neuro-oncology advancesReview
- Gene × environment interaction between latrophilin-3 (Lphn3 or Adgrl3) and developmental permethrin exposure in Sprague Dawley rats.Neurotoxicology and teratologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Radiation is an effective treatment for many brain tumors, but often causes cognitive impairment. Ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) radiotherapy is less toxic to many normal tissues and may protect against adverse cognitive effects of cranial irradiation. Adult male Sprague Dawley rats received a single 18 Gy fraction of cranial irradiation with protons at 1 Gy/s (CV), 60 Gy/s (FLASH-60), 95 Gy/s (FLASH-95), or sham treatment (Control) (n ≥ 22/group). Rats were tested in open-field, acoustic (ASR) and tactile startle (TSR), novelty preference, radial water maze (RWM), Morris water maze (MWM), Cincinnati water maze configurations A and B (CWM-A CWM-B), and novelty tests. Locomotion was decreased and TSR increased in all irradiated rats and ASR increased in FLASH-95 rats compared with Controls. In MWM acquisition and reversal, the CV and FLASH-60 rats had reduced path efficiency but during shift and shift reversal all irradiated rats had increased latencies and reduced path efficiencies compared with Controls. In CWM-A all irradiated rats performed below Controls. There were no differences found in CWM-B, novelty tests, or RWM. In summary, FLASH treatment after 18 Gy cranial proton irradiation did not result in reduced cognitive toxicity.
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.