2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2019.108952
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of fast neutron RBE using a fully mechanistic computational model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
(90 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Step 2: Track-structure simulations 2.3.1. Nuclear DNA model Despite an abundance of nuclear DNA models that are described in the literature (Friedland et al 2011, Lampe et al 2018, Tang et al 2019, Zhu et al 2020a, Sakata et al 2020, Zabihi et al 2020, there were no complete open-source models available at the time of this study. Thus, we constructed a custom nuclear DNA model using the TOPAS extensions framework.…”
Section: 3mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Step 2: Track-structure simulations 2.3.1. Nuclear DNA model Despite an abundance of nuclear DNA models that are described in the literature (Friedland et al 2011, Lampe et al 2018, Tang et al 2019, Zhu et al 2020a, Sakata et al 2020, Zabihi et al 2020, there were no complete open-source models available at the time of this study. Thus, we constructed a custom nuclear DNA model using the TOPAS extensions framework.…”
Section: 3mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For each scoring volume k and initial neutron or x-ray energy E, particles were simulated until 1 Gy of dose was delivered to the nucleus. A target dose D 0 of 1 Gy was chosen for consistency with recent literature (Baiocco et al 2016, Tang et al 2019, Zhu et al 2020a, Zabihi et al 2020. Additional simulations were performed with alternative D 0 values to assess dose dependence, as described in section 2.6.…”
Section: Irradiation Setupmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other authors have published descriptions of far more complex models, for example using GEANT 4 and other simulations, with multiple assumptions regarding biophysical events such as DNA double strand break (DSB) production density etc, and over much more limited energy ranges than the present study (Chen et al 2017, Zabihi et al 2020. The DSB end point, although better than single strand breaks, may not adequately reflect cell killing for RBE determination, since DSB are normally repaired efficiently.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Cell death is better correlated with lethal chromosome breaks (Cornforth and Bedford 1987). For example, the advanced models of Boccacio and colleagues (Zabihi et al 2020) consider the relative proportions of other ion species produced within a neutron beam using fundamental and phenomenological approaches, but there is no validation with extant biological data sets. This group did predict a second peak of RBE between 20 and 40 MeV, as appeared to be the case for the experimental data of Hall et al (1975) as shown in figure 6, but when the NEeff correction is applied for Hall's 35 and 50 MeV beams effective neutron energy this peak at 35 MeV cannot be found, since (Hall et al 1975), H=Hammersmith (Berry 1973, Berry andBewley 1976), followed by the fission sources at P=Petten (Hall et al 1975), B(A)=Brookhaven (full spectrum) (Hall et al 1975), B(B)=Brookhaven (using plate converter assumed to have max energy of 6 MeV) (Hall et al 1975).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation