Radiobiological effects of altering dose rate in filter-free photon beams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To validate that altering radiotherapy dose rate through either changing pulse repetition frequency or instantaneous dose rate does not have an effect on cell survival, two human carcinoma and a hamster lung cell line were irradiated with various beam settings. Varian TrueBeam linac with a flattening filter free mode of operation was used for all experiments. The results obtained indicate that either method of changing dose rate has no effect on cell survival in the three cell lines studied. Filtered and filter free modes were also compared in treatments with protracted dose delivery which significantly increases overall treatment time. Cell survival indicated no difference between filter and filter free beam delivery in any of the protraction schemes. An increase in survival was seen in both modes upon protracting dose delivery to 15, 30 or 60 min rather than delivering acutely. Further, analysis of induced DNA double-strand breaks via the γH2AX assay showed no difference between filtered and unfiltered beams. The following study suggests that increasing dose rate is an acceptable manner of decreasing radiotherapy treatment time that does not have any detrimental effects on in vitro cell eradication.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".