MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474700658 · doi:10.1118/1.4957083

SU‐G‐TeP3‐03: Dose Enhancement of Gold Nanoparticle in Proton Therapy: A Monte Carlo Study Based On the Transmission Electron Microscopy Imaging

2016· article· en· W2474700658 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary‐Anne Young, Myriam Laprise‐Pelletier, Jean Lagueux, Marie‐France Côté, M Fordin, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtonVesicleTransmission electron microscopyMaterials scienceProton therapyMolecular physicsRADIUSColloidal goldMonte Carlo methodBragg peakNanoparticleMicroscopyChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Nuclear magnetic resonanceNanotechnologyOpticsMembranePhysicsNuclear physicsMathematicsChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Gold nanoparticle (GNP) is a promising radiosensitizer that selectively boosts tumor dose in radiotherapy. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) imaging observations recently revealed for the first time that GNP exists in vivo in the form of highly localized vesicles, instead of hypothetical uniform distribution. This work investigates the corresponding difference of energy deposition in proton therapy. Methods: First, single vesicles of various radii were constructed by packing GNPs (as Φ50 nm gold spheres) in spheres and were simulated, as well as a single GNP. The radial energy depositions (REDs) were scored using 100 concentric spherical shells from 0.1µm to 10µm, 0.1µm thickness each, for both vesicles and GNP, and compared. TEM images, 8 days after injection in a PC3 prostate cancer murine model, were used to extract position/dimension of vesicles, as well as contours of cytoplasmic and nucleus membranes. Vesicles were then constructed based on the TEM images. A 100 MeV proton beam was studied by using the Geant4‐DNA code, which simulates all energy deposition events. Results: The vesicle REDs, normalized to the same proton energy loss as in a single GNP, are larger (smaller) than that of a single GNP when radius >2µm (<2µm). The peak increase (at about 3µm radius) is about 10% and 18% for Φ1µm and Φ1.6µm vesicles respectively, relative to a single GNP. The TEM‐based simulation resulted in a larger energy deposition (by about one order of magnitude) that follows completely different pattern from that of hypothetical GNP distributions (regular dotted pattern in extracellular and/or extranucleus regions). Conclusion: The in vivo energy deposition, both in pattern and magnitude, of proton therapy is greatly affected by the true distribution of the GNP, as illustrated by the presence of GNP vesicles compared to hypothetical scenarios. Work supported by NSERC Discovery Grant #435510, Canada

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207