MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973757097 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/21/012

Relative biological damage and electron fluence in and out of a 6 MV photon field

2009· article· en· W1973757097 on OpenAlexaff
Alasdair Syme, Charles Kirkby, Razmik Mirzayans, M. Mackenzie, C. Field, B. G. Fallone

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelative biological effectivenessIrradiationRadiationFluenceNuclear medicineRadiation damageOpticsPhotonRadiation therapyPhysicsMaterials scienceMedicineNuclear physicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scattered radiation in the penumbra of a megavoltage radiation therapy beam can deposit a non-negligible dose in the healthy tissue around a target volume. The lower energy of the radiation in this region suggests that its biological effectiveness might not be the same as that of the open beam. In this work, we determined the relative biological damage in normal human fibroblasts after megavoltage irradiation in two geometries. The first was an open-beam irradiation and the second was a blocked configuration in which only scattered radiation could reach the target cells. The biological damage was evaluated by the gamma-H2AX immunofluorescence assay, which is capable of detecting DNA double-strand breaks in individual cells. We report that the scattered radiation is more effective at producing biological damage than the open beam radiation. We found a 27% enhancement in the net mean nuclear gamma-H2AX fluorescence intensity at 2 Gy and a 48% enhancement at 4 Gy. These findings are of interest due to the increased doses of penumbral radiation close to target volumes both in dose escalation studies and in IMRT treatment deliveries where high dose gradients exist for the purpose of conformal avoidance of healthy tissues.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207