SU‐E‐T‐581: On the Value of LET as a Radiation Quality Descriptor for RBE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the relationship between linear energy transfer (LET) and relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for protons and light ions, and the corresponding role of LET as a descriptor of radiation quality of hadron therapy. Methods: Monte Carlo (MC) proton and light ion (He, Li, C) tracks with LET < 30 eV nm‐1 were generated in an event‐by‐event mode. They were overlaid on a cell nucleus model containing 6×109 nucleotide base pairs using an isotropic irradiation procedure that provides electronic equilibrium. Strand breaks (sbs) were scored in the DNA sugar‐phosphate groups and further sub‐classified into single or double sbs (ssbs or dsbs). Distributions of ssbs and dsbs for 2 Gy fractions were calculated to estimate RBE for the induction of initial dsbs with reference to 60Co. Additionally, sbs were classified based on their complexity (i.e. the number of sbs in each cluster). Results: An increase in LET for light ions of the same atomic number or a decrease in atomic number for ions of the same LET resulted in a lower kinetic energy of emitted secondary electrons. The clustering of DNA damage was more pronounced as reflected by the increase in proton RBE from ∼ 1.75 to 4 for LET values of 7 to 28 eV nm‐1. A significant RBE decrease between protons, He, Li and C ions of the same LET was also noticed as function of the atomic number. Significant differences in ssbs and dsbs complexities were also seen for particles with the same LET, potentially supporting a clustering‐based radiation quality descriptor. Conclusion: The LET‐RBE relationships were simulated for proton and light ions and exhibited expected trends, including different RBEs for particles with the same LET but different atomic numbers. A complexity based radiation quality descriptor may allow better differentiation of RBE between radiation fields of similar LET. We would like to acknowledge support from the Fonds de recherche du Quebec Sante (FRQS), from the CREATE Medical Physics Research Training Network grant (number 432290) of NSERC, support from NSERC under grants RGPIN 397711‐11 and RGPIN‐2014‐06475 and support from CIHR under grants MOP‐114910, MOP‐136774 and MOP‐102550.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".