Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42410429›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2026

Differential biological effects of scattered versus scanned clinical proton beams on Ewing sarcoma models.

Frédérique Mégnin-Chanet, Marc Laurans, Amélia Maia Leite, Carine Laurent, Anthony Bonfrate, Karine Laud-Duval, Samia Chaouni, Annalisa Patriarca, Valentin Calugaru, Vincent Favaudon and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Frédérique Mégnin-ChanetINSERM IRIS U1353/ CNRS UMR9029, Orsay, 91405, France. frederique.megnin@curie.fr.
Marc LauransInstitut Curie, Bât. 110-112, rue H. Becquerel, Centre Universitaire, Orsay, 91405, France.
Amélia Maia LeiteProton Therapy Center, Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Curie, Orsay, France.
Carine LaurentNormandie University, UNICAEN, UNIROUEN, ABTE-EA4651, Caen, France.
Anthony BonfrateINSERM IRIS U1353/ CNRS UMR9029, Orsay, 91405, France.
Karine Laud-DuvalSIREDO Oncology Center, Institut Curie, PSL University, INSERM U1330/CNRS EMR 8001, Paris, 75005, France.
Samia ChaouniNormandie University, UNICAEN, UNIROUEN, ABTE-EA4651, Caen, France.
Annalisa PatriarcaProton Therapy Center, Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Curie, Orsay, France.
Valentin CalugaruRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d'Ulm, Paris, 75005, France.
Vincent FavaudonINSERM IRIS U1353/ CNRS UMR9029, Orsay, 91405, France.
Pierre Verrelle *Institut Curie, Bât. 110-112, rue H. Becquerel, Centre Universitaire, Orsay, 91405, France.
Ludovic De Marzi *INSERM IRIS U1353/ CNRS UMR9029, Orsay, 91405, France.

Funding

Fondation EDF R-2018-07 D4008/10.11.16/530Région Normandie ESPRITS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProton therapy (PT), first delivered passively using the Double Scattering (DS) technique, has shifted to active delivery through the Pencil Beam technique (PBS). However, the biological effectiveness of DS versus PBS proton beams on cancer cells, remain largely unknown. Given that PBS-PT is now commonly used to treat young patients with Ewing sarcoma, this point is of major importance in clinical practice and raises the question of the same effectiveness of both proton modalities on tumor control.

methodsThis study aims to compare the biological effects of clinical PBS vs. DS proton beams on various Ewing sarcoma cell lines. For this, we used a clinical Proteus 235 isochronous cyclotron capable of delivering both PBS and DS treatment modalities. Three different cancerous Ewing cell models were irradiated either in the plateau or in mid Spread-Out Bragg Peak (SOBP). We performed cell survival assays (2D monolayers and 3D spheroids), along with Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) production (CellRox deep red assay) and quantification of 53BP1 foci 1 h and 18 h post-irradiation by immunofluorescence.

resultsNo significant differences were observed in cell survival (either in 2D or in 3D) at the plateau or mid-SOBP between the two proton treatment modalities. However, higher ROS production and a greater number of residual 53BP1 foci were observed in PBS compared to DS technique.

conclusionsBoth PBS and DS proton irradiation modalities exhibit the same in vitro biological effectiveness on Ewing sarcoma models. However, the question of the possible influence of the ROS/53BP1 increase on the onset of side effects or late toxicities when using the PBS irradiation technique, may arise.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsProton TherapySarcoma, EwingCell Line, TumorCell SurvivalHumansReactive Oxygen SpeciesScattering, RadiationReactive Oxygen SpeciesDouble scatteringEwing sarcomaPencil beam scanningPlateau - spheroidsProton therapyROSSOBP

Identifiers

PMID42410429
PMCPMC13644066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.