Paper detail

Is the track-event theory of cell survival internally consistent?

The "track event theory" (TET) has been developed in recent years as an alternative to the phenomenological linear-quadratic model for cell survival under exposure to ionizing radiation, particularly for heavy charged particles. The TET is based on a few simple model assumptions including the possibility to derive some of the model parameters from nanodosimetry. This work intends to carve out more clearly the basic assumptions behind the TET and to critically review the resulting mathematical model equations. It is demonstrated that the model assumptions of Poisson distribution and statistical independence of the frequency distributions of so-called one-track and two-track events follow from the Poisson distribution of the number of tracks affecting the considered target volume. It is also shown that the modified TET model equation used in the literature for consideration of repair is inconsistent with the model assumptions and requires an additional model parameter. Furthermore, the derivation of the model parameters from nanodosimetric properties of particle track structure is revealed to lead to a pure exponential dose dependence when the potentially large number of relevant nanometric target volumes inside a cell nucleus is accounted for.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.