DNA Dosimetry with Gold Nanoparticle Irradiated by Proton Beams: A Monte Carlo Study on Dose Enhancement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heavy atom nanoparticles, such as gold nanoparticles, are proven effective radiosensitizers in radiotherapy to enhance the dose delivery for cancer treatment. This study investigated the effectiveness of cancer cell killing, involving gold nanoparticle in proton radiation, by changing the nanoparticle size, proton beam energy, and distance between the nanoparticle and DNA. Monte Carlo (MC) simulation (Geant4-DNA code) was used to determine the dose enhancement in terms of dose enhancement ratio (DER), when a gold nanoparticle is present with the DNA. With varying nanoparticle size (radius = 15–50 nm), distance between the gold nanoparticle and DNA (30–130 nm), as well as proton beam energy (0.5–25 MeV) based on the simulation model, our results showed that the DER value increases with a decrease of distance between the gold nanoparticle and DNA and a decrease of proton beam energy. The maximum DER (1.83) is achieved with a 25 nm-radius gold nanoparticle, irradiated by a 0.5 MeV proton beam and 30 nm away from the DNA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".