Radiation dose enhancement in skin therapy with nanoparticle addition: A Monte Carlo study on kilovoltage photon and megavoltage electron beams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigated the dose enhancement due to the incorporation of nanoparticles in skin therapy using the kilovoltage (kV) photon and megavoltage (MV) electron beams. Monte Carlo simulations were used to predict the dose enhancement when different types and concentrations of nanoparticles were added to skin target layers of varying thickness. METHODS: nanoparticles with concentrations ranging from 3 to 40 mg/mL. The dose enhancement ratio (DER), defined as the dose at the target layer with nanoparticle addition divided by the dose at the layer without nanoparticle addition, was calculated for each nanoparticle type, nanoparticle concentration and target layer thickness. RESULTS: It was found that among all nanoparticles, Au had the highest DER (5.2-6.3) when irradiated with kV photon beams. Dependence of the DER on the target layer thickness was not significant for the 220 kVp photon beam but it was for 105 kVp beam for Au nanoparticle concentrations higher than 18 mg/mL. For other nanoparticles, the DER was dependent on the atomic number of the nanoparticle and energy spectrum of the photon beams. All nanoparticles showed an increase of DER with nanoparticle concentration during the photon beam irradiations regardless of thickness. For electron beams, the Au nanoparticles were found to have the highest DER (1.01-1.08) when the beam energy was equal to 4 MeV, but this was drastically lower than the DER values found using photon beams. The DER was also found affected by the depth of maximum dose of the electron beam and target thickness. For other nanoparticles with lower atomic number, DERs in the range of 0.99-1.02 were found using the 4 and 6 MeV electron beams. CONCLUSION: In nanoparticle-enhanced skin therapy, Au nanoparticle addition can achieve the highest dose enhancement with 105 kVp photon beams. Electron beams, while popular for skin therapy, did not produce as high dose enhancements as kV photon beams. Additionally, the DER is dependent on nanoparticle type, nanoparticle concentration, skin target thickness and energies of the photon and electron beams.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".