ArticleActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2025
Determining the effects of hyperthermia on the tumor and acute normal tissue response of FLASH radiation.
Article in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is limited indication of how hyperthermia would influence the unique proposition of FLASH radiation - its ability to maintain comparable tumor response while offering protection to normal tissues. Hence, this study was designed to investigate the potential of combining FLASH radiation with hyperthermia. MATERIALS AND
methodsExperiments were performed using female CDF1 mice, where the tumor bearing or non-tumor bearing right hind legs were irradiated with either conventional dose rate (CONV) or FLASH radiation ± hyperthermia. Hyperthermia was applied 30 minutes after radiation at 42.5°C for 60 minutes. The tumor endpoint was growth delay to three times its initial treatment volume (TGT3) and the normal tissue endpoint was an acute skin toxicity of score 2.5 and above, characterized by moderate moist desquamation and partial leg deformity.
resultsIn tumor studies, the thermal enhancement ratio (TER) was 1.68 for FLASH radiotherapy and 1.50 for conventional (CONV) radiation. In acute skin toxicity studies, the TER was slightly lower, at 1.37 for FLASH and 1.29 for CONV. The dose modifying factor (DMF) in tumor studies was 1.12 but decreased to 1.00 when hyperthermia was added. Similarly, in acute skin toxicity studies, the DMF was initially 1.53 and dropped to 1.45 with the addition of hyperthermia.
interpretationHyperthermia significantly sensitized both the CONV and FLASH radiation, but the enhancement is comparable between the two different dose rate radiations in both tumors and normal tissues.
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.