ReviewRadiation and environmental biophysics2026
Range of dose enhancement factor for gold nanoparticles in radiotherapy using Monte Carlo simulations.
Review in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gold nanoparticles (GNPs) have been widely investigated as radiosensitizers in preclinical radiotherapy studies and are now advancing into clinical trials. To enhance tumour targeting, various molecular vectors are conjugated with GNPs. The localized radiation energy deposited near GNPs mainly originates from photoelectrons, Auger electrons, x-ray fluorescence, and Compton electrons, resulting in higher tumour doses compared to conventional radiotherapy. Due to the nanometer-scale size of GNPs, the energy from secondary low-energy electrons is confined to nanometer to micrometer ranges, making direct dose measurements impractical. Monte Carlo (MC) simulations are therefore commonly employed to estimate absorbed dose distributions around GNPs under different experimental conditions. However, published MC results show significant variability due to diverse simulation parameters. This review presents a quantitative analysis of reported dose distributions and dose enhancement factors (DEFs) from MC simulations. It also discusses the range of physical radiation doses and DEFs for GNPs irradiated by various radiation types, including kV/MV x-rays, synchrotrons, electrons, protons, heavy ions, and therapeutic radionuclides. To support understanding of the dose enhancement mechanisms, the underlying physical interaction processes of these radiation types with water and gold are reviewed. The range of reported DEFs helps bridge the gap between physical dose enhancement and observed biological effects. Finally, we recommend a qualitative estimate of the contribution of chemical species produced by the GNPs interactions to the consequent enhanced biological effects. This allows total dose enhancement from GNPs in radiotherapy, considering physical and chemical aspects, to be estimated using MC simulations as a complement to experiments.
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.