Comment on "Reproducibility study of Monte Carlo simulations for nanoparticle dose enhancement and biological modeling of cell survival curves" by Velten et al. [Biomed Phys Eng Express 2023;9:045004]

Hans Rabus

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/ad1731

2023-09-10

Abstract:This comment highlights two methodological issues with the recent article by Velten et al. [Biomed Phys Eng Express 2023;9:045004]

Medical Physics,Biological Physics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Comment on "Biological modeling of gold nanoparticle enhanced radiotherapy for proton therapy" by Lin et al. [Phys. Med. Biol. 60 (2015) 4149-4168]

Hans Rabus

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.01981

2023-02-11

Abstract:In their article published in Phys. Med. Biol. 60 (2015) 4149-4168, Lin et al studied the radiosensitizing effect of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) using radiation transport simulations and a biological model for the survival of irradiated cells. This comment points out several caveats to the methodlogy used by Lin et al. that may not be evident to readers and may contribute to confusion in the literature about the radiation effects of gold nanoparticles. The two main caveats are the high mass fraction of gold considered and a potential problem with the modified local effect model used to predict cell survival.

Medical Physics,Computational Physics
Article Commentary on "Microdosimetric and radiobiological effects of gold nanoparticles at therapeutic radiation energies" [T.M. Gray et al., IJRB 2023, 99(2), 308-317]

Hans Rabus,Miriam Schwarze,Leo Thomas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2023.2245468

2023-04-22

Abstract:In the recently published article by T.M. Gray et al. "Microdosimetric and radiobiological effects of gold nanoparticles at therapeutic radiation energies" (IJRB 2023, 99(2), 308-317) results of Monte Carlo simulations and radiobiological assays on the dosimetric effects of gold nanoparticles were presented. This commentary points out that the results of the two parts of the study are in contradiction and that the predicted magnitude of dose enhancement and its dependence on the shape of the nanoparticle appear implausible. Possible reasons for these observations are discussed.

Medical Physics
Comment on "Comparing gold nano-particle enhanced radiotherapy with protons, megavoltage photons and kilovoltage photons: A Monte Carlo simulation" by Lin et al [Phys. Med. Biol. 59 (2014) 7675-7689]

Hans Rabus

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.01978

2023-02-11

Abstract:In their article published in Phys. Med. Biol. 59 (2014) 7675-7689, Lin et al studied the dose enhancement of of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) for proton therapy, which they compared with the case of photon irradiation. This comment points out two caveats to the methodlogy used by Lin et al that may not be evident to readers and may contribute to confusion in the literature about the dose enhancement by gold nanoparticles.

Medical Physics,Computational Physics
Comment on "Extension of Rietveld Refinement for Benchtop Powder XRD Analysis of Ultrasmall Supported Nanoparticles" by J. Lipp et al. (Chem. Mater. 2022, 34, 18, 8091-8111)

Zbigniew Kaszkur

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.10434

2022-12-20

Materials Science

Abstract:The comment gives principal arguments proving that the claims given in the title of the commented paper and some its conclusions have to be wrong for principal reasons. An example illustrating the arguments is provided via atomistic simulation.
Publisher Correction: on the Issue of Transparency and Reproducibility in Nanomedicine.

Hon S. Leong,Kimberly S. Butler,C. Jeffrey Brinker,May Azzawi,Steve Conlan,Christine Dufès,Andrew Owen,Steve Rannard,Chris Scott,Chunying Chen,Marina A. Dobrovolskaia,Serguei V. Kozlov,Adriele Prina-Mello,Ruth Schmid,Peter Wick,Fanny Caputo,Patrick Boisseau,Rachael M. Crist,Scott E. McNeil,Bengt Fadeel,Lang Tran,Steffen Foss Hansen,Nanna B. Hartmann,Lauge P. W. Clausen,Lars M. Skjolding,Anders Baun,Marlene Ågerstrand,Zhen Gu,Dimitrios A. Lamprou,Clare Hoskins,Leaf Huang,Wantong Song,Huiliang Cao,Xuanyong Liu,Klaus D. Jandt,Wen Jiang,Betty Y. S. Kim,Korin E. Wheeler,Andrew J. Chetwynd,Iseult Lynch,Seyed Moein Moghimi,André Nel,Tian Xia,Paul S. Weiss,Bruno Sarmento,José das Neves,Hélder A. Santos,Luis Santos,Samir Mitragotri,Steve Little,Dan Peer,Mansoor M. Amiji,Maria José Alonso,Alke Petri-Fink,Sandor Balog,Aaron Lee,Barbara Drasler,Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser,Stefan Wilhelm,Handan Acar,Roger G. Harrison,Chuanbin Mao,Priyabrata Mukherjee,Rajagopal Ramesh,Lacey R. McNally,Sara Busatto,Joy Wolfram,Paolo Bergese,Mauro Ferrari,Ronnie H. Fang,Liangfang Zhang,Jie Zheng,Chuanqi Peng,Bujie Du,Mengxiao Yu,Danielle M. Charron,Gang Zheng,Chiara Pastore

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0496-9

2019-01-01

Abstract:An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.
Reply to "Comment on 'Comparison of potential models with the pp-scattering data below 350 MeV.' "

V.Stoks,J.J. de Swart

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.nucl-th/9312004

1993-12-08

Abstract:Replying to the above Comment by <a class="link-external link-http" href="http://G.Q.Li" rel="external noopener nofollow">this http URL</a> and <a class="link-external link-http" href="http://R.Machleidt" rel="external noopener nofollow">this http URL</a>, we point out that the supposed "flaws" in our Comparison of NN potential models with the pp- scattering data [ Phys.Rev.C47,761(1993) ] are in reality not flaws at all.

Nuclear Theory
Comment on "A single level tunneling model for molecular junctions: evaluating the simulation methods" by Opodi et al

Ioan Baldea

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/D2CP05110A

2023-02-17

Abstract:The present Comment demonstrates important flaws of the paper Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2022, 24, 11958 by Opodi~\emph{et al.} Their crown result (``applicability map'') aims at indicating parameter ranges wherein two approximate methods (called method 2 and 3) apply. My calculations reveal that the applicability map is a factual error. Deviations of $I_2$ from the exact current $I_1$ do not exceed 3\% for model parameters where Opodi~\emph{et al.} claimed that method 2 is inapplicable. As for method 3, the parameter range of the applicability map is beyond its scope, as stated in papers cited by Opodi~\emph{et al.}~themselves.

Mesoscale and Nanoscale Physics,Chemical Physics,Computational Physics
Comment on "A single level tunneling model for molecular junctions: evaluating the simulation methods" by E. M. Opodi, X. Song, X. Yu and W. Hu, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. , 2022, 24 , 11958"

Ioan Bâldea

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d2cp05110a

IF: 3.3

2024-02-10

Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics

Abstract:The present Comment demonstrates important flaws of the paper Opodi et al. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. , 2022, 24 , 11958 Their crown result ("applicability map") aims at indicating parameter ranges wherein two approximate methods (called method 2 and 3) apply. My calculations reveal that the applicability map is a factual error. Deviations of I 2 from the exact current I 1 do not exceed 3% for model parameters where Opodi et al. claimed that method 2 is inapplicable. As for method 3, the parameter range of the applicability map is beyond its scope, as stated in papers cited by Opodi et al. themselves.

chemistry, physical,physics, atomic, molecular & chemical
Letter to the Editor Concerning "Simultaneous, Single-Particle Measurements of Size and Loading Give Insights into the Structure of Drug-Delivery Nanoparticles"

Andrew C. Madison,Adam L. Pintar,Craig R. Copeland,Natalia Farkas,Samuel M. Stavis

2023-07-10

Abstract:The vexing error of excess variance in the sizing of single particles degrades accuracy in applications ranging from quality control of nanoparticle products to hazard assessment of nanoplastic byproducts. The particular importance of lipid nanoparticles for vaccine and medicine delivery motivates this comment on a publication$^{\textrm{1}}$ in ACS Nano. In ref 1, the benchmark measurements of a nanoparticle standard manifest large errors of the size distribution that contradict the claim of validation. Such errors can bias the correlation of fluorescence intensity as an optical proxy for the molecular loading of lipid nanoparticles and give misleading insights from power-law models of intensity$-$size data. Looking forward, measurement error models have the potential to address this widespread issue.

Soft Condensed Matter
Intercomparison of Micro- and Nanodosimetry Monte Carlo Simulations: an Approach to Assess the Influence of Different Cross-Sections for Low-Energy Electrons on the Dispersion of Results

Carmen Villagrasa,Hans Rabus,Giorgio Baiocco,Yann Perrot,Alessio Parisi,Lara Struelens,Rui Qiu,Michael Beuve,Floriane Poignant,Marcin Pietrzak,Heidi Nettelbeck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2021.106675

IF: 1.743

2022-01-01

Radiation Measurements

Abstract:An intercomparison of microdosimetric and nanodosimetric quantities simulated Monte Carlo codes is in progress with the goal of assessing the uncertainty contribution to simulated results due to the uncertainties of the electron interaction cross-sections used in the codes. In the first stage of the intercomparison, significant discrepancies were found for nanodosimetric quantities as well as for microdosimetric simulations of a radiation source placed at the surface of a spherical water scoring volume. This paper reports insight gained from further analysis, including additional results for the microdosimetry case where the observed discrepancies in the simulated distributions could be traced back to the difference between track-structure and condensed-history approaches. Furthermore, detailed investigations into the sensitivity of nanodosimetric distributions to alterations in inelastic electron scattering cross-sections are presented which were conducted in the lead up to the definition of an approach to be used in the second stage of the intercomparison to come. The suitability of simulation results for assessing the sought uncertainty contributions from cross-sections is discussed and a proposed framework is described.
Commentary regarding "An entropy model for Carreau nanofluid ciliary flow with electroosmosis and thermal radiations: A numerical study"

Asterios Pantokratoras

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.202300300

2024-02-21

Electrophoresis

Abstract:A serious error exists in the paper: Alharbi KAM, Riaz A, Sikandar S. An entropy model for Carreau nanofluid ciliary flow with electroosmosis and thermal radiations: a numerical study. Electrophoresis. 2024;45:https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.202300081.

biochemical research methods,chemistry, analytical
Reproducible validation and replication studies in nanoscale physics

N. C. Clementi,L. A. Barba

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0068

2021-03-29

Abstract:Credibility building activities in computational research include verification and validation, reproducibility and replication, and uncertainty quantification. Though orthogonal to each other, they are related. This paper presents validation and replication studies in electromagnetic excitations on nanoscale structures, where the quantity of interest is the wavelength at which resonance peaks occur. The study uses the open-source software PyGBe : a boundary element solver with treecode acceleration and GPU capability. We replicate a result by Rockstuhl et al. (2005, doi:10/dsxw9d) with a two-dimensional boundary element method on silicon carbide (SiC) particles, despite differences in our method. The second replication case from Ellis et al. (2016, doi:10/f83zcb) looks at aspect ratio effects on high-order modes of localized surface phonon-polariton nanostructures. The results partially replicate: the wavenumber position of some modes match, but for other modes they differ. With virtually no information about the original simulations, explaining the discrepancies is not possible. A comparison with experiments that measured polarized reflectance of SiC nano pillars provides a validation case. The wavenumber of the dominant mode and two more do match, but differences remain in other minor modes. Results in this paper were produced with strict reproducibility practices, and we share reproducibility packages for all, including input files, execution scripts, secondary data, post-processing code and plotting scripts, and the figures (deposited in Zenodo). In view of the many challenges faced, we propose that reproducible practices make replication and validation more feasible. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Reliability and reproducibility in computational science: implementing verification, validation and uncertainty quantification in silico ’.
A COMMENT ON “LATTICE BOLTZMANN SIMULATION AND FRACTAL ANALYSIS OF EFFECTIVE THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY IN POROUS MEDIA”

Hans Janssen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2024.122646

IF: 6.4

2024-04-01

Applied Thermal Engineering

Abstract:In May 2020, this journal published the paper “Lattice Boltzmann simulation and fractal analysis of effective thermal conductivity in porous media”, applying and comparing a lattice-Boltzmann-based simulation model and a fractal-material-based analytical model for effective thermal conductivity of porous media. This comment, which is considered a post-publication review, reveals however that the paper’s fractal model often exceeds the upper bound as defined by the parallel model. These exceedances are physically unsound, as this upper bound is well established and widely recognised. This comment is therefore challenging the paper’s current Figures 6, 8 and 10 directly, as well as contesting the paper’s Figure 9 indirectly. Consequently, this comment invites the paper’s authors to reassess the fractal model as well as to reconsider the research findings in their reply.

energy & fuels,engineering, mechanical,thermodynamics,mechanics
Reply to "Issues arising from benchmarking single-cell RNA sequencing imputation methods"

Mo Huang,Nancy R. Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1909.02492

2019-09-05

Abstract:In our Brief Communication (DOI: <a class="link-https link-external" data-doi="10.1038/s41592-018-0033-z" href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-018-0033-z" rel="external noopener nofollow">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-018-0033-z</a>), we presented the method SAVER for recovering true gene expression levels in noisy single cell RNA sequencing data. We evaluated the performance of SAVER, along with comparable methods MAGIC and scImpute, in an RNA FISH validation experiment and a data downsampling experiment. In a Comment [<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="1908.07084v1" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.07084v1">arXiv:1908.07084v1</a>], Li & Li were concerned with the use of the downsampled datasets, specifically focusing on clustering results obtained from the Zeisel et al. data. Here, we will address these comments and, furthermore, amend the data downsampling experiment to demonstrate that the findings from the data downsampling experiment in our Brief Communication are valid.

Applications,Genomics,Quantitative Methods
Reply To The 'Comment On "Microflow In A Rhythmically Expanding Alveolar Chip With Dynamic Similarity"' By A. Tsuda And F. S. Henry, Lab Chip, 2021, 21, Doi: 10.1039/D0lc00884b

Huimin Lv,Jun Dong,Yue Yang,Yonggang Zhu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d0lc01271h

IF: 7.517

2021-01-01

Lab on a Chip

Abstract:This article provides our response to a comment on our article published in Lab on a Chip (H. Lv, J. Dong, Y. Qiu, Y. Yang and Y. Zhu, Lab Chip, 2020, 20, 2394-2402) by Tsuda and Henry, Lab Chip, 2020.
Simulation Study Based on Cell Survival Database

Monika Mietelska,Marcin Pietrzak,Aleksandr Bancer,Antoni Ruciński,Zygmunt Szefliński,Beata Brzozowska

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25105094

IF: 5.6

2024-05-09

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Abstract:Details of excitation and ionization acts hide a description of the biological effects of charged particle traversal through living tissue. Nanodosimetry enables the introduction of novel quantities that characterize and quantify the particle track structure while also serving as a foundation for assessing biological effects based on this quantification. This presents an opportunity to enhance the planning of charged particle radiotherapy by taking into account the ionization detail. This work uses Monte Carlo simulations with Geant4-DNA code for a wide variety of charged particles and their radiation qualities to analyze the distribution of ionization cluster sizes within nanometer-scale volumes, similar to DNA diameter. By correlating these results with biological parameters extracted from the PIDE database for the V79 cell line, a novel parameter R2 based on ionization details is proposed for the evaluation of radiation quality in terms of biological consequences, i.e., radiobiological cross section for inactivation. By incorporating the probability p of sub-lethal damage caused by a single ionization, we address limitations associated with the usually proposed nanodosimetric parameter Fk for characterizing the biological effects of radiation. We show that the new parameter R2 correlates well with radiobiological data and can be used to predict biological outcomes.

biochemistry & molecular biology,chemistry, multidisciplinary
Intercomparison of Dose Enhancement Ratio and Secondary Electron Spectra for Gold Nanoparticles Irradiated by X-rays Calculated Using Multiple Monte Carlo Simulation Codes.

W. B. Li,A. Belchior,M. Beuve,Y. Z. Chen,S. Di Maria,W. Friedland,B. Gervais,B. Heide,N. Hocine,A. Ipatov,A. P. Klapproth,C. Y. Li,J. L. Li,G. Multhoff,F. Poignant,R. Qiu,H. Rabus,B. Rudek,J. Schuemann,S. Stangl,E. Testa,C. Villagrasa,W. Z. Xie,Y. B. Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.12.011

2020-01-01

Abstract:PURPOSE:Targeted radiation therapy has seen an increased interest in the past decade. In vitro and in vivo experiments showed enhanced radiation doses due to gold nanoparticles (GNPs) to tumors in mice and demonstrated a high potential for clinical application. However, finding a functionalized molecular formulation for actively targeting GNPs in tumor cells is challenging. Furthermore, the enhanced energy deposition by secondary electrons around GNPs, particularly by short-ranged Auger electrons is difficult to measure. Computational models, such as Monte Carlo (MC) radiation transport codes, have been used to estimate the physical quantities and effects of GNPs. However, as these codes differ from one to another, the reliability of physical and dosimetric quantities needs to be established at cellular and molecular levels, so that the subsequent biological effects can be assessed quantitatively.METHODS:In this work, irradiation of single GNPs of 50 nm and 100 nm diameter by X-ray spectra generated by 50 and 100 peak kilovoltages was simulated for a defined geometry setup, by applying multiple MC codes in the EURADOS framework.RESULTS:The mean dose enhancement ratio of the first 10 nm-thick water shell around a 100 nm GNP ranges from 400 for 100 kVp X-rays to 600 for 50 kVp X-rays with large uncertainty factors up to 2.3.CONCLUSIONS:It is concluded that the absolute dose enhancement effects have large uncertainties and need an inter-code intercomparison for a high quality assurance; relative properties may be a better measure until more experimental data is available to constrain the models.
Consistency checks of results from a Monte Carlo code intercomparison for emitted electron spectra and energy deposition around a single gold nanoparticle irradiated by X-rays

H. Rabus,W.B. Li,H. Nettelbeck,J. Schuemann,C. Villagrasa,M. Beuve,S. Di Maria,B. Heide,A.P. Klapproth,F. Poignant,R. Qiu,B. Rudek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2021.106637

2021-11-23

Abstract:Organized by the European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), a Monte Carlo code intercomparison exercise was conducted where participants simulated the emitted electron spectra and energy deposition around a single gold nanoparticle (GNP) irradiated by X-rays. In the exercise, the participants scored energy imparted in concentric spherical shells around a spherical volume filled with gold or water as well as the spectral distribution of electrons leaving the GNP. Initially, only the ratio of energy deposition with and without GNP was to be reported. During the evaluation of the exercise, however, the data for energy deposition in the presence and absence of the GNP were also requested. A GNP size of 50 nm and 100 nm diameter was considered as well as two different X-ray spectra (50 kVp and 100kVp). This introduced a redundancy that can be used to cross-validate the internal consistency of the simulation results. In this work, evaluation of the reported results is presented in terms of integral quantities that can be benchmarked against values obtained from physical properties of the radiation spectra and materials involved. The impact of different interaction cross-section datasets and their implementation in the different Monte Carlo codes is also discussed.

Medical Physics
Corrigendum: Effect of Carbon Ion Radiation Induce Bystander Effect on Metastasis of A549 Cells and Metabonomic Correlation Analysis

Zhen Yang,Qiuning Zhang,Hongtao Luo,Lihua Shao,Ruifeng Liu,Yarong Kong,Xueshan Zhao,Yichao Geng,Chengcheng Li,Xiaohu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.783377

IF: 4.7

2021-10-12

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.601620.].

oncology
Revisiting Inconsistency in Large Pharmacogenomic Studies

Zhaleh Safikhani,Petr Smirnov,Mark Freeman,Nehme El-Hachem,Adrian She,Quevedo Rene,Anna Goldenberg,Nicolai J Birkbak,Christos Hatzis,Leming Shi,Andrew H Beck,Hugo J W L Aerts,John Quackenbush,Benjamin Haibe-Kains

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.9611.3

2016-01-01

F1000Research

Abstract:Background: In 2012, two large pharmacogenomic studies, the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) and Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE), were published, each reported gene expression data and measures of drug response for a large number of drugs and hundreds of cell lines. In 2013, we published a comparative analysis that reported gene expression profiles for the 471 cell lines profiled in both studies and dose response measurements for the 15 drugs characterized in the common cell lines by both studies. While we found good concordance in gene expression profiles, there was substantial inconsistency in the drug responses reported by the GDSC and CCLE projects. Our paper was widely discussed and we received extensive feedback on the comparisons that we performed. This feedback, along with the release of new data, prompted us to revisit our initial analysis. Here we present a new analysis using these expanded data in which we address the most significant suggestions for improvements on our published analysis: that drugs with different response characteristics should have been treated differently, that targeted therapies and broad cytotoxic drugs should have been treated differently in assessing consistency, that consistency of both molecular profiles and drug sensitivity measurements should both be compared across cell lines to accurately assess differences in the studies, that we missed some biomarkers that are consistent between studies, and that the software analysis tools we provided with our analysis should have been easier to run, particularly as the GDSC and CCLE released additional data. Methods: For each drug, we used published sensitivity data from the GDSC and CCLE to separately estimate drug dose-response curves. We then used two statistics, the area between drug dose-response curves (ABC) and the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), to robustly estimate the consistency of continuous and discrete drug sensitivity measures, respectively. We also used recently released RNA-seq data together with previously published gene expression microarray data to assess inter-platform reproducibility of cell line gene expression profiles. Results: This re-analysis supports our previous finding that gene expression data are significantly more consistent than drug sensitivity measurements. The use of new statistics to assess data consistency allowed us to identify two broad effect drugs — 17-AAG and PD-0332901 — and three targeted drugs — PLX4720, nilotinib and crizotinib — with moderate to good consistency in drug sensitivity data between GDSC and CCLE. Not enough sensitive cell lines were screened in both studies to robustly assess consistency for three other targeted drugs, PHA-665752, erlotinib, and sorafenib. Concurring with our published results, we found evidence of inconsistencies in pharmacological phenotypes for the remaining eight drugs. Further, to discover “consistency” between studies required the use of multiple statistics and the selection of specific measures on a case-by-case basis. Conclusion: Our results reaffirm our initial findings of an inconsistency in drug sensitivity measures for eight of fifteen drugs screened both in GDSC and CCLE, irrespective of which statistical metric was used to assess correlation. Taken together, our findings suggest that the phenotypic data on drug response in the GDSC and CCLE continue to present challenges for robust biomarker discovery. This re-analysis provides additional support for the argument that experimental standardization and validation of pharmacogenomic response will be necessary to advance the broad use of large pharmacogenomic screens.

Comment on "Reproducibility study of Monte Carlo simulations for nanoparticle dose enhancement and biological modeling of cell survival curves" by Velten et al. [Biomed Phys Eng Express 2023;9:045004]

Comment on "Biological modeling of gold nanoparticle enhanced radiotherapy for proton therapy" by Lin et al. [Phys. Med. Biol. 60 (2015) 4149-4168]

Article Commentary on "Microdosimetric and radiobiological effects of gold nanoparticles at therapeutic radiation energies" [T.M. Gray et al., IJRB 2023, 99(2), 308-317]

Comment on "Comparing gold nano-particle enhanced radiotherapy with protons, megavoltage photons and kilovoltage photons: A Monte Carlo simulation" by Lin et al [Phys. Med. Biol. 59 (2014) 7675-7689]

Comment on "Extension of Rietveld Refinement for Benchtop Powder XRD Analysis of Ultrasmall Supported Nanoparticles" by J. Lipp et al. (Chem. Mater. 2022, 34, 18, 8091-8111)

Publisher Correction: on the Issue of Transparency and Reproducibility in Nanomedicine.

Reply to "Comment on 'Comparison of potential models with the pp-scattering data below 350 MeV.' "

Comment on "A single level tunneling model for molecular junctions: evaluating the simulation methods" by Opodi et al

Comment on "A single level tunneling model for molecular junctions: evaluating the simulation methods" by E. M. Opodi, X. Song, X. Yu and W. Hu, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. , 2022, 24 , 11958"

Letter to the Editor Concerning "Simultaneous, Single-Particle Measurements of Size and Loading Give Insights into the Structure of Drug-Delivery Nanoparticles"

Intercomparison of Micro- and Nanodosimetry Monte Carlo Simulations: an Approach to Assess the Influence of Different Cross-Sections for Low-Energy Electrons on the Dispersion of Results

Commentary regarding "An entropy model for Carreau nanofluid ciliary flow with electroosmosis and thermal radiations: A numerical study"

Reproducible validation and replication studies in nanoscale physics

A COMMENT ON “LATTICE BOLTZMANN SIMULATION AND FRACTAL ANALYSIS OF EFFECTIVE THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY IN POROUS MEDIA”

Reply to "Issues arising from benchmarking single-cell RNA sequencing imputation methods"

Reply To The 'Comment On "Microflow In A Rhythmically Expanding Alveolar Chip With Dynamic Similarity"' By A. Tsuda And F. S. Henry, Lab Chip, 2021, 21, Doi: 10.1039/D0lc00884b

Simulation Study Based on Cell Survival Database

Intercomparison of Dose Enhancement Ratio and Secondary Electron Spectra for Gold Nanoparticles Irradiated by X-rays Calculated Using Multiple Monte Carlo Simulation Codes.

Consistency checks of results from a Monte Carlo code intercomparison for emitted electron spectra and energy deposition around a single gold nanoparticle irradiated by X-rays

Corrigendum: Effect of Carbon Ion Radiation Induce Bystander Effect on Metastasis of A549 Cells and Metabonomic Correlation Analysis

Revisiting Inconsistency in Large Pharmacogenomic Studies