ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Early molecular changes induced by FLASH irradiation in MCF10A and MDA-MB-231 breast cell lines.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We used the non-tumorigenic MCF10A and triple-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cell lines to compare cell response to CONV and FLASH dose-rates under normoxic conditions. Beyond evaluating cell survival and DNA/microtubule damage, we assessed transcriptomic and immunological profiles to describe putative molecular changes. Oxidative stress induced by two different irradiation modalities was also investigated. Methods: Breast cell lines were irradiated with electron beams at increasing doses of 2, 4, 6, 9, 11, and 15 Gy delivered at either FLASH (230 Gy/s) or CONV (6 Gy/min) dose rates. Survival fractions were determined by clonogenic assay and dose-response curves. DNA damage was quantified by γ-H2AX and 53BP1 foci counting at 0.5, 1, and 24 hours after treatment with 2 and 5 Gy, while microtubule damage was evaluated by confocal microscopy. Transcriptomic profiling was performed by RNA sequencing 24 hours after RT with doses of 9 and 15 Gy. Immunological profiles were analyzed by using Luminex technique at 24, 48, and 72 hours post-RT. The GSH/GSSG ratio was also measured by mass spectrometry at 24 hours post-treatments to assess differences in cellular oxidative status. Results: Cell survival was comparable between FLASH and CONV regimens in both cell lines. However, a dose-rate effect was observed at the level of early DNA damage, with increased γ-H2AX foci 1 hour after FLASH-RT in both cell lines, and greater persistence of 53BP1 foci at 24 hours in MDA-MB-231 cells, suggesting a dose-dependent response. Immunological profiling showed no qualitative differences between dose rates; nevertheless, MDA-MB-231 cells produced higher levels of several factors after FLASH-RT, whereas MCF10A cells displayed minimal variation. Transcriptomic profiling revealed a broader gene modulation following FLASH-RT, with mitochondrial gene upregulation in MCF10A cells and induction of structural genes in MDA-MB-231 cells. No significant differences in glutathione balance were detected between FLASH and CONV irradiation in either breast cell line. Discussion: Our findings provide new insights into the early biological responses to ultra-high dose rates
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.