FLASH radiotherapy's bold approach to cancer treatment
marc__1
195 points
61 comments
March 07, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 50.8ms across 3,471 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Pulsed High-Power Radio Energy Can Cause Harmful Effects on the Brain (2024) greesil · 16 pts · March 16, 2026 · 45% similar
- New iron nanomaterial wipes out cancer cells without harming healthy tissue gradus_ad · 274 pts · March 01, 2026 · 45% similar
- A sea of sparks: Seeing radioactivity maurycyz · 59 pts · March 30, 2026 · 44% similar
- AI engineer uses ChatGPT+AlphaFold to develop cancer vaccine for his dog bensandcastle · 11 pts · March 13, 2026 · 42% similar
- Tech boss uses AI and ChatGPT to create cancer vaccine for his dying dog sxp · 14 pts · March 14, 2026 · 41% similar
Discussion Highlights (10 comments)
tiderpenger
I generally don't trust cancer-communication if it's juiced up like this incredible headline. There has been huge amounts of progress. We don't need silicon valley idiots starting to make proclamations. It's doing fine without your mediocrity.
bitwize
Sounds a little too close, in both name and concept, to Therac for my comfort.
Eduard
Theryq - why would they go with this name when everyone in the field knows about the Therac-25 radiation overexposure incidents?
scythe
Hey, FLASH finally hit Hacker News! I remember my professors talking about this in graduate school. It's a fairly well-established effect: the tumor selectivity of radiation is much better at ultra-high dose rates. It is still unclear exactly why. But there are a lot of studies about it: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41571-022-00697-z
slibhb
> Currently, the most plausible theory emerging from her team’s research points to metabolism: Healthy and cancerous cells may process reactive oxygen species—unstable oxygen-containing molecules generated during radiation—in very different ways. Reminds me of this which I (think) was linked here a while ago: https://www.nature.com/articles/s12276-020-0384-2 It really does feel like all these piecemeal cancer treatments are converging on something resembling a cure.
amelius
What is the intensity at the focal point versus areas surrounding it?
mv4
Does this have to do with cell division?
owenthejumper
The major issue isn't the speed of delivery, and the cancer. The key question is how do you spare normal tissue, and how do you prove the normal tissue is spared in the long term. Current answer is: You break it apart into multiple sessions, the anti-thesis of FLASH. Source: my wife is a radiation oncologist.
MeteorMarc
Hopefully, this will turn out better than proton therapy, which held similar promises of improvement. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11506991/
mbil
The PubPeer discussion of the original paper is kind of interesting https://pubpeer.com/publications/A32D7989007655CBF8D9DB2A250...