ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2026
The Impacts of FLASH Radiation Therapy and Conventional Radiation Therapy on the Cognitive Abilities of Mice.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Preclinical studies have demonstrated that FLASH radiation therapy (RT) delivered at ultrahigh-dose rates exerts a preferential normal tissue-sparing effect. This study aimed to delineate the disparities in delayed cognitive function and biological outcomes of whole-brain irradiation in healthy mice, comparing FLASH-RT with conventional RT (CONV-RT). Methods and Materials: Eighty adult male C57BL/6J mice were divided into 5 groups: Sham, CONV-RT10Gy, CONV-RT20Gy, FLASH-RT10Gy, and FLASH-RT20Gy. Whole-brain irradiation was conducted on mice using a miniaturized x-ray FLASH platform at field-average dose rates of 2 Gy/min for CONV-RT and 213 Gy/s for FLASH-RT. Two months after irradiation, we assessed the mice's cognitive function and the number of astrocytes and neurons in the hippocampus, then conducted proteomic analyses of their hippocampus. Results: Following the administration of a 20 Gy FLASH-RT dose, the incidence of radiodermatitis was markedly lower than that observed with CONV-RT, accompanied by an improvement in survival rates. Compared with the Sham and FLASH-RT groups, the CONV-RT group exhibited reduced exploration of the open arms in the elevated plus maze, diminished preference for the novel arm in the Y-maze, a lower discrimination index in the novel object recognition test, and prolonged latency to reach the platform in the water maze test. Compared with the FLASH-RT group, the CONV-RT group exhibited an increase in astrocytes and a decrease in neurons in the hippocampus. Proteomic analysis revealed that FLASH-RT may improve the oxidative stress damage caused by CONV-RT. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that FLASH-RT conferred significant advantages over CONV-RT in preserving delayed cognitive function and reducing radiation-induced toxicity in healthy mice. Compared with CONV-RT, FLASH-RT mitigated behavioral deficits across multiple cognitive domains and attenuated hippocampal oxidative stress, highlighting its neuroprotective potential. These findings provided compelling preclinical evidence supporting the therapeutic promise of FLASH-RT as a safer alternative to conventional RT for protecting normal brain function.
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.