ArticleJournal of radiation research2025
Performance evaluation of ESR dosimeters under proton beam FLASH irradiation conditions.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Two chemical dosimeters, lithium formate monohydride (LFM) and L-alanine (ALA), were first evaluated under ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) proton irradiation conditions, known as 'FLASH', which has the potential to reduce the impact on normal tissue while effectively killing tumors, using electron spin resonance (ESR) spectroscopy. Both ALA and LFM demonstrated a significant linear increase in ESR peaks that correlated with the physical dose when comparing conventional radiation (CONV) to UHDR radiation. The relative effectiveness (RE: the ratio of the amount of free radicals produced by each type of proton irradiation to the amount produced by 60Co γ-ray irradiation) was determined for CONV, UHDR-Plateau and UHDR-Peak, yielding RE values of 0.849, 0.731 and 0.661 for LFM and 0.834, 0.692 and 0.624 for ALA, respectively. The decrease in RE values was likely due to the combination of UHDR and the increase of linear energy transfer (LET) to facilitate the recombination of radicals formed within the crystal during CONV and UHDR of proton beams. When using the height of the ESR central peak as an indicator of sensitivity, LFM was assessed to be ~20% more sensitive than ALA.
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.