Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
To study the effect of dose-rate in the time evolution of chemical yields produced in pure water versus a cellular-like environment for FLASH radiotherapy research. A version of TOPAS-nBio with Tau-Leaping algorithm was used to simulate the homogenous chemistry stage of water radiolysis using three chemical models: 1) liquid water model that considered scavenging of eaq-, H● by dissolved oxygen; 2) Michaels & Hunt model that considered scavenging of ●OH, eaq-, and H● by biomolecules existing in cellular environment; 3) Wardman model that considered model 2) and the chemical repair enzyme glutathione (GHS). H2O2 concentrations at conventional and FLASH dose-rates were compared with published measurements. Model 3) was used to estimate DNA single-strand break (SSB) yields and compared with published data. SSBs were estimated from simulated yields of DNA hydrogen abstraction and attenuation factors to account for the scavenging capacity of the medium. The simulation setup consisted of monoenergetic protons (100 MeV) delivered in pulses at conventional (0.2857Gy s⁻¹) and FLASH (500Gy s⁻¹) dose rates. Dose varied from 5-20Gy, and oxygen concentration from 10µM-1mM. At the steady state, for model 1), H2O2 concentration differed by 81.5%±4.0% between FLASH and conventional dose-rates. For models 2) and 3) the differences were within 8.0%±4.8%, and calculated SSB yields agreed with published data within 3.8%±1.2%. A maximum oxygen concentration difference of 60% and 50% for models 2) and 3) between conventional and FLASH dose-rates was found between 2106 and 91013 ps for 20 Gy of absorbed dose. The findings highlight the importance of developing more advanced cellular models to account for both the chemical and biological factors that comprise the FLASH effect. It was found that differences between pure water and cellular environment models were significant and extrapolating results between the two should be avoided. Observed differences call for further experimental investigation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ada517 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!