Time, Dose, and Volume Responses in a Mouse Pulmonary Injury Model Following Ablative Irradiation
Lung, ISSN: 1432-1750, Vol: 194, Issue: 1, Page: 81-90
2016
- 18Citations
- 25Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations18
- Citation Indexes18
- 18
- CrossRef2
- Captures25
- Readers25
- 25
Article Description
Purpose: We aimed to determine the time, dose, and volume responses in a mouse pulmonary injury model following ablative dose focal irradiation (ADFIR) in order to better understand normal lung injury. Methods and Materials: ADFIR was administered to the left lung of mice using a small animal micro-irradiator. Histopathological evaluation and micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) analyses were performed at 1, 2, 6, and 12 weeks after irradiation. Dose responses were tested at doses of 0–90 Gy in C57BL/6 and C3H/HeJCr mice at 6 weeks after irradiation. The volume effect was evaluated with 1-, 3-, and 5-mm diameter collimators at 1-4 weeks after 90-Gy irradiation. Results: ADFIR caused gross local lung injury of the inflated lung in just 1 week, with extensive hyaline material visible in the irradiated area. The fibrosing process was initiated as early as 2 weeks after irradiation. C3H and C57 mice did not show significant differences in dose response. Six weeks after irradiation, the radiation dose-response curve had a sigmoidal shape, where the lag, log, and stationary phases occurred at <40, 50–70, and >80 Gy, respectively. ADFIR induced substantial volume-dependent structural and functional damage to the lungs, and the volume changes of lung consolidation on micro-CT correlated inversely with lung fibrosis over time. Conclusions: We determined the time, dose, and volume responses in our established small animal model, and found that lung injury was substantially accelerated and phenotypically different from that of prior studies using non-ablative hemi-thorax and complete thorax irradiation schemes.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84957850032&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00408-015-9825-4; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26563330; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00408-015-9825-4; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00408-015-9825-4; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00408-015-9825-4
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know