ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026
Ultra-high-dose-rate pulsed irradiation and the conditional FLASH effect: dosimetry, multiscale biology, and clinical translation.
Review in Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultra-high-dose-rate (UHDR) pulsed irradiation can deliver therapeutic doses within an extremely short time window, but UHDR is a physical delivery state, whereas the FLASH effect is a conditional comparative phenotype in which normal-tissue injury is reduced relative to a spatially dose-comparable conventional-dose-rate (CDR) irradiation comparator without loss of tumor control. This Review integrates evidence across four levels: physical exposure characterization, dosimetric measurement, biological comparison, and clinical translation. We examine the temporal structure and quality-assurance requirements of electron, very-high-energy electron, photon, proton, and heavy-ion UHDR platforms; synthesize positive, negative, and conditional findings across normal-tissue and tumor models; and integrate mechanistic studies spanning multiple time scales. Current evidence does not support 40 Gy/s, or any single average dose-rate metric, as either a sufficient or a necessary threshold for the FLASH effect. Effect magnitude and reproducibility are more likely determined jointly by dose per pulse, pulse structure, total delivery time, fractionation, irradiated volume, radiation quality, tissue-specific radiobiological characteristics, and biological state. Mechanistic data likewise favor multiscale coupling across time rather than a single explanatory pathway, although several causal links from early oxygen and radical dynamics to cellular and tissue outcomes still lack direct interventional validation. Human studies have established the feasibility of clinical UHDR delivery on selected electron and proton platforms and have provided preliminary safety data, but comparative clinical benefit over CDR irradiation has not yet been demonstrated. Further translation should therefore prioritize pulse-resolved traceable dosimetry, organ-specific normal-tissue dose-response relationships, late toxicity, comparable tumor control, and concurrent comparative clinical endpoints, with expansion guided by prespecified stage-gated translational criteria.
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.