info@auctorespublishing.com
+1-(302)-520-2644
+1-(302)-520-2644

Radiation-induced eye impairments

  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews
  4. Archives
Submit Guidelines

Review ariticle

Radiation-induced eye impairments

  • V. Zahariev 1
  • N. Hristov 2*
  • St. Vizev 1
  • P. Angelova 1

*Corresponding Author: Nikolai Hristov, Department of Preventive Medicine, Medical University-Sofia.

Citation: V. Zahariev, N. Hristov, St. Vizev, P. Angelova, (2024), Radiation-induced eye impairments, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, 17(5); DOI:10.31579/2690-4861/446

Copyright: © 2024, Nikolai Hristov. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Received: 10 April 2024 | Accepted: 10 May 2024 | Published: 12 June 2024

Keywords: ionizing radiation; radiation-induced eye impairment; radiotherapy; radiation incidents; post-irradiation eye reactions

Abstract

The problem of the impact of ionizing radiation on eye structures is one of the most important and topical in radiobiology. Knowledge of tissue radiosensitivity and induced tissue changes in the eye is essential for understanding the nature of radiation damage and the behavior of medical professionals. In this publication, the early and late determined radiation-induced impairments of the eye are presented as a result of radiotherapy or radiation incidents. The risk factors determining post-irradiation eye reactions, pathophysiological mechanisms, clinical picture, diagnosis, prevention, and new approaches in therapy are presented. We found that the typically found radiation-induced eye impairments are those of the eyelids – dermatosis and madarosis, conjunctiva – acute conjunctivitis, varied damage to the lacrimal apparatus, cornea – edema and ulceration, iris – rarely inflammation or neovascularization, sclera – rarely atrophy or necrosis, eye lens – cataract, retina – characteristic retinopathy, and optical nerve – rarely neuropathy. We provide the current consensus on prevention and treatment protocols in radiation-induced eye impairments, though most suggested treatment so far should qualify as experimental.

Introduction

The aim of our study was to summarize and describe the current scientific consensus on the possible radiation-induced eye impairments, circumstances under which they arise, and identify the available prevention and treatment options. To this end, we performed a systematic literature review in 2023. Keywords entered in relevant databases such as PubMed, were ionizing radiation, radiation-induced eye impairment, radiotherapy, radiation incidents, post-irradiation eye reactions. Languages used during the literature search were English, German, French and Russian, though we settled finally on citing English and German sources.

The effects of ionizing radiation on the eye were first described by Chalupecky as early as 1897 [1]. In-depth systematic studies on the action of ionizing radiation on the structures of the eye began to be conducted by Rohrschneider, who in 1929 proposed a scale reflecting the different radiosensitivity of the eye structures - starting with the lens, as the most radiosensitive tissue, followed by the conjunctiva, the cornea, the uvea, the retina and ends with the most radiation- resistant – the sclera [2]. Poppe continued these studies and in 1942 published their results [3]. The first scientific reports describing the effects of ionizing radiation on the eyes of those working in such an environment - with a cyclic accelerator (cyclotron) were made by Abelson and Kruger, and in individuals who survived the atomic bombings, by Cogan et al. in 1949. Early damage mainly affects the rapidly proliferating epithelial cells and occurs during the course of irradiation or several weeks after. Blepharitis, conjunctivitis and keratitis usually develop. Late radiation-induced damages develop after a latent period of several months to tens of years, depending on the individual biological characteristics and the absorbed dose. These changes are mainly due to endothelial damage and microcirculatory dysfunction or to genomic damage to epithelial cells that do not die immediately after irradiation but have the potential to divide and differentiate, as in radiation cataract. Typical late radiation-induced injuries are cataracts, radiation retinopathy, and radiation-induced optic neuropathy [4, 5].

Eyelids

Early radiation-induced damage to the eyelids includes dermatitis and madarosis at cumulative doses > 20 Gy with conventional fractionation, and extremely rarely at doses of 10 Gy delivered over three days. Loss of eyelashes can cause irritation conjunctiva and cornea. The skin of the eyelids reacts to ionizing radiation like the skin of other anatomical sites. The first reaction is erythema (usually after 2 weeks), which is followed shortly by dry desquamation. The skin at this time is warm and sometimes edematous. Microscopically, the overlying dermal vessels are dilated and an inflammatory infiltration with granulocytes, macrophages, eosinophils, plasma cells, and lymphocytes is observed. Erythema is usually transient and resolves quickly [6]. Hamilton et al. found that predisposing factors for increased skin radiosensitivity were advanced age, previous prolonged sun exposure and male gender. At cumulative doses exceeding 50 Gy, moist desquamation, sometimes secondary infection, and cicatrixes, resulting from unhealed ulcers, more often develop.

Late radiation-induced damage to the eyelids is relatively rare. These include telangiectasia and skin atrophy, permanent loss of eyelashes and depigmentation, usually at cumulative doses > 50 Gy. Fibrosis, scarring, and clinically significant eyelid deformity may develop. Regrowth of eyelashes sometimes leads to trichiasis or distichiasis, intense pain caused by growing eyelashes, irritation and even ulceration of the cornea. Keratinization of the palpebral conjunctiva, especially of the upper eyelid, may also cause corneal damage. Cicatrization can lead to entropion or ectropion [6].

Conjunctiva

Acute radiation-induced conjunctivitis occurs relatively frequently at doses ≥ 30 Gy. Studies by Stafford et al. found manifestations of radiation conjunctivitis in 46% of patients treated for orbital lymphoma with a mean cumulative dose of 27 Gy [7]. Clinical symptoms are characterized by conjunctival injection, often accompanied by significant chemosis, watery discharge and discomfort. Secondary bacterial or less commonly viral infections, usually from adenoviruses, may develop. Patients have the feeling of sand in the eye and piercing pain. There may be rhinorrhea or other respiratory symptoms. Viral conjunctivitis is often accompanied by enlarged periauricular lymph nodes, which helps in the correct diagnosis. Late radiation-induced damage to the conjunctiva usually occurs at doses ≥ 35 Gy. Conjunctival telangiectasias are relatively common. Stafford et al. described such vascular changes in the conjunctiva, in patients treated for orbital lymphoma, even at doses of 30 Gy [7]. Subconjunctival hemorrhages develop rarely and do not threaten vision. Chronic conjunctivitis, squamous epithelial metaplasia, and conjunctival keratinization have been observed at doses exceeding 50 Gy. In parallel, corneal abrasion may also occur. At doses > 60 Gy, permanent damage to the conjunctiva can cause symblepharon, leading to desiccation or restriction of eye movements [7].

Lacrimal apparatus

Early radiation-induced xerophthalmia results from either damage to the acinar cells of the lacrimal gland or damage to the meibomian glands, which are the major source of tear lipids and maintain normal tear film stability. Dysfunction of the Meibomian glands in itself is a state of inflammation and contributes to disruption of homeostatic regulation of the tear film and development of dry eye syndrome (DES, keratoconjunctivitis sicca). The pathology of the "dry eye" syndrome is more accurately represented by the term "ocular surface disease". It is categorized into three degrees – mild, moderate and severe, with the severity of the clinical symptoms being directly dependent on the dose and varying from itching, burning, feeling of a foreign body and fatigue in the eyes to severe redness, inflammation and pain. Various methods are used to diagnose and assess the severity of the disease – biomicroscopy; examination of the basal tear production by means of the Schirmer test; diagnostic staining of the anterior eye segment with fluorescein, rose bengal, lissamine green; measuring the osmolality of the tear film; determining the size of the tear meniscus; study the stability of the tear film, by tracking the time to tear; meibography, etc., through the use of corneal topographers. The standardized questionnaire OSDI (Ocular surface disease index) can be used to objectify the severity of the subjective symptoms and the effectiveness of the therapy. Early effects include conjunctival inflammation, chemosis, and tear film instability with subsequent dry eye sensation. These symptoms usually subside, but sometimes they can be quite persistent [8]. Kennerdell et al. reported that at doses of about 25 Gy for the treatment of orbital lymphoma, half of the patients had an early mild form of xerophthalmia. With moderate dose irradiation, between 30 and 45 Gy, late manifestations of dry eye syndrome manifest after 4 to 11 years. High doses of ionizing radiation aggravate the clinical picture and lead to a permanent decrease in the number of Goblet cells and loss of serous acinar cells. According to Merriam et al. the risk of atrophy and fibrosis of the lacrimal gland increases significantly with cumulative doses ≥ 50 Gy conventional fractionation, as well as after a single dose of 20 Gy. At doses above 57 Gy, severe dry eye syndrome develops [9]. Clinical symptoms appear within 1 month after irradiation, with dry eye usually resulting in vascularization and corneal opacification, which appear after 9 to 10 months. Doses > 60 Gy result in permanent loss of lacrimal secretion and profound keratoconjunctivitis sicca. Patients with severe lacrimal gland dysfunction complain of burning, redness, thick secretion, "foreign body sensation", blurred vision and photophobia. Dry eye syndrome can progress to vision loss, corneal opacification, ulceration, and vascularization. In rare cases, complications of secondary infection or perforation may occur. Bulbar phthisis and symblepharon can sometimes be seen. The tolerated doses to the lacrimal gland with conventional fractionation are similar to the tolerated doses to the salivary glands and are estimated to be about 30 to 40 Gy [9]. According to Emami et al., TD 5/5 (5% risk of dry eye syndrome over 5 years) was estimated at 35 Gy and TD 50/5 (50% risk of dry eye syndrome over 5 years) at 50 Gy [10] Studies by Parsons et al. showed a negligible risk at doses < 30> 40 Gy, and 100

Discussion

The effects of ionizing radiation on the eye were first described by the end of the 19th century. The first scientific reports describing the effects of ionizing radiation on the eye came around the time of the Second World War. Early damage mainly affects the rapidly proliferating epithelial cells and occurs during the course of irradiation or several weeks after. Blepharitis, conjunctivitis and keratitis usually develop. Late radiation-induced damages develop after a latent period of several months to tens of years, depending on the individual biological characteristics and the absorbed dose. These changes are mainly due to endothelial damage and microcirculatory dysfunction or to genomic damage to epithelial cells that do not die immediately after irradiation but have the potential to divide and differentiate, as in radiation cataract. Typical late radiation-induced injuries are cataracts, radiation retinopathy, and radiation-induced optic neuropathy. Radiation-induced eye injuries turn out to be common and sometimes unavoidable complications of radiotherapy but should also be anticipated as a result of radiation accidents and possible radiological terrorism. Some problems are apparent here: the knowledge of most medical personnel on radiation-induced injuries, including eye injuries, is limited; prevention and treatment options are also limited and with somewhat unconfirmed effect. We came to some conclusions which follow. 

Conclusions

Radiation-induced damage to the eye is a common and sometimes unavoidable complication of both radiotherapy and radiation accidents. Reducing their frequency is possible by enriching our knowledge about radiation tolerance of eye structures, risk factors, pathogenetic mechanisms, clinical picture, prevention and treatment measures. A more active and detailed study of pathogenesis, immunological and pathophysiological changes is needed in order to introduce new approaches in therapy. More prevention and treatment options are necessary and research into them should be accelerated.

References

  1. Chalupecky H., Über die wirkung der röntgenstrahlen auf das auge and die haut, Zentbl Augenheilk, 1897, 21, 234-368
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  2. Rohrschneider, W., Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die Veränderungen normaler Augengewebe nach Röntgenbestrahlung. Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 1929, 122(2), 282-298
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  3. Poppe E., Experimental investigation of the effects of roentgen rays on the eye, Oslo. Thesis, 1942
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  4. Abelson P.H. and Kruger P.G., Cyclotron-induced radiation cataracts, Science, 1949, 110, 655-657
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  5. Cogan D.G., Martin S.F., Kimura S.J., Atom bomb cataracts, Science, 1949, 110, 654-655
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  6. Hamilton C.S., Denham J.W., O'Brien M. et al., Under prediction of human skin erythema at low doses per fraction by the linear quadratic model, Radiother Oncol., 1996, 40(1), 23-30
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  7. Stafford S.L., Kozelsky T.F., Garrity J.A., et al., Orbital lymphoma: radiotherapy outcome and complications, Radiother Oncol., 2001, 59(2), 139-144
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  8. Kennerdell J.S., Flores N.E., Hartsock R.J., Low-dose radiotherapy for lymphoid lesions of the orbit and ocular adnexa, Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg., 1999, 15(2), 129-133
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  9. Merriam G.R., Szechter A., Focht E.F., The effects of ionizing radiations on the eye. Front Radiat Ther Oncol., 1972, 5, 346-385
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  10. Emami B., Lyman J., Brown A. et al., Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys., 1991, 21(1), 109-122
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  11. Parsons J.T., Bova F.J., Fitzgerald C.R. et al., Severe dry eye syndrome following external beam irradiation, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1994, 30(4), 775-780
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  12. Parsons J.T., Bova F.J., Mendenhall W.M. et al., Response of thenormal eye to high dose radiotherapy, Oncology (Williston Park) 1996, 10(6), 837-847
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  13. McCartney E., Valluri S., Rushing D. et al., Upper and lower system nasolacrimal duct stenosis secondary to paclitaxel, Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg., 2007, 23(2), 170-171
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  14. Barabino S., Raghavan A., Loeffler J. et al., Radiotherapy-induced ocular surface disease, Cornea, 2005, 24(8), 909-914
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  15. Smith G.T., Deutsch G.P., Cree I.A. et al., Permanent corneal limbal stem cell dysfunction following radiotherapy for orbital lymphoma, Eye (Lond), 2000, 14(6), 905-907
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  16. Jeganathan V.S.E., Wirth A., MacManus M.P., Ocular risks from orbital and periorbital radiation therapy: a critical review, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys., 2011, 79(3), 650-659
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  17. Coats G., Further cases of thrombosis of the central vein. Roy Lond Ophthal Hosp Rep, 1906; 16:516
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  18. Weiss D.I., Shaffer R.N., Nehrenberg T.R., Neovascular glaucoma complicating carotid-cavernous fistula, Arch Ophthalmol., 1963; 69, 304-307
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  19. Tarr K.H.& Constable I.J., Late complications of pterygium treatment, Br J Ophthalmol, 1980, 64, 496-505
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  20. Petrovich Z., McDonnell J.M., Palmer D. et al., Histopathologic changes following irradiation for uveal tract melanoma, Am J Clin Oncol, 1994, 17(4), 298-306
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  21. Hirst L.W., The treatment of pterygium, Surv Ophthalmol, 2003, 48(2), 145-180
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  22. Shields C.L., Shields J.A., Cater J. et al., Plaque radiotherapy for retinoblastoma: longterm tumour control and treatment complications, Ophthalmology, 2001, 108(11), 2116-2121
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  23. Shields C.L., Naseripour M., Shields J.A. et al., Custom-designed plaque radiotherapy for non-resectable iris melanoma in 38 patients: tumour control and ocular complications, Am J Ophthalmol, 2003, 135(5), 648-656
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  24. MacKenzie F.D., Hirst L.W., Kynaston B. & Bain C., Recurrence rate and complications after beta-irradiation for pterygia, Ophthalmology, 1991, 98(12), 1776-1781
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  25. Birch-Hirschfeld G.V.A., Zur wirkung der röntgenstrahlen auf das menschliche auge, Klin Monatsbl Augenheilk, 1908, 46:129
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  26. ICRP, Publication 118, ICRP Statement on Tissue Reactions/Early and Late Effects of Radiation in Normal Tissues and Organs – Threshold Doses for Tissue Reactions in a Radiation Protection Context, 2012
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  27. Hamada N., Azizova T.V., Little M.P., An update on effects of ionizing radiation exposure on the eye. Br J Radiol. 2020;93(1115):20190829
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  28. UNSCEAR, Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation, Annex A: Attributing health effects to ionizing radiation exposure and inferring risks, UNSCEAR 2012 Report, New York, United Nations Publications, 2015
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  29. Ferrufino-Ponce, Z. et B. Henderson, Radiotherapy and Cataract Formation, Seminars in Ophthalmology, 2006, 21, 171-180
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  30. Mark, P. A Review of Non-Cancer Effects, Especially Circulatory and Ocular Diseases, Radiat Environ Biophys. 2013, 52(4), 435-449
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  31. Worgul B.V., Kundiyev Y.I., Sergiyenko N.M. et al., Cataracts among Chernobyl clean-up workers: implications regarding permissible eye exposures, Radiat. Res., 2007, 167(2), 233-243
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  32. Minamoto A., Taniguchi H., Yoshitani N. et al., Cataract in atomic bomb survivors, Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 2004, 80(5), 339-345
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  33. Nakashima E., Neriishi K., Minamoto A., A reanalysis of atomic-bomb cataract data, 2000–2002: a threshold analysis, Health Phys., 2006, 90(2), 154-160
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  34. Hanna C., O’Brien J.E., Lens epithelial cell proliferation and migration in radiation cataracts, Radiat. Res., 1963,1 9(1), 1-11
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  35. Worgul B.V., Rothstein H., On the mechanism of radiocataractogenesis, Medikon, 1977, 6, 5-14
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  36. Worgul B.V., Merriam Jr. G.R., Medvedovsky C., Cortical cataract development – an expression of primary damage to the lens epithelium, Lens. Eye Toxic. Res., 1989, 6(4), 559-571
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  37. Jose J.G., The role of DNA damage, its repair and its misrepair in the etiology of cataract: a review, Ophthalm. Res., 1978, 10, 52-62
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  38. Kleiman N.J., Spector A., DNA single strand breaks in human lens epithelial cells from patients with cataract, Curr. Eye Res., 1993, 12, 423-431
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  39. Kleiman, N.J., Radiation Cataract, Ann ICRP2012; 41, 80-97
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  40. Blakely E.A., Kleiman N.J., Neriishi K. et al., Radiation cataractogenesis: epidemiology and biology. Meeting report, Radiat. Res., 2010,173(5), 709-717
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  41. Holsclaw D.S., Merriam Jr. G.R., Medvedovsky C. et al., Stationary radiation cataracts: an animal model, Exp. Eye Res., 1989, 48(3), 385-398
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  42. Matsuda H., Giblin F.J., Reddy V.N., The effect of X-irradiation on cation transport in rabbit lens, Exp. Eye Res., 1981, 33(3), 253-265
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  43. Babizhayev M.A., Deyev A.I., Linberg L.F., Lipid peroxidation as a possible cause of cataract., Mech. Ageing. Dev., 1988, 44(1), 69-89
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  44. Spector A., Wang G.M., Wang R.R., The prevention of cataract caused by oxidative stress in cultured rat lenses.
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  45. II. Early effects of photochemical stress and recovery, Exp. Eye Res., 1993, 57(6), 659-667
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  46. Spector A., Oxidative stress-induced cataract: mechanism of action, FASEB J., 1995, 9(12), 1173-1182
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  47. Hamada N., Fujimichi Y., Iwasaki T. et al., Emerging issues in radiogenic cataracts and cardiovascular disease. J Radiat Res., 2014, 55(5), 831-846
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  48. Uwineza A., Kalligeraki A.A., Hamada N. et al., Cataractogenic load - A concept to study the contribution of ionizing radiation to accelerated aging in the eye lens, Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res., 2019, 779, 68-81
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  49. Richardson R.B., Ainsbury E.A., Prescott C.R., Lovicu F.J., Etiology of posterior subcapsular cataracts based on a review of risk factors including aging, diabetes, and ionizing radiation. Int J Radiat Biol., 2020, 96(11), 1339- 1361
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  50. Stallard H.B., Radiant energy as (a) a pathogenetic and (b) a therapeutic agent in ophthalmic disorders, Br J Ophthalmol, 1933, 6, 1-126
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  51. Elsås T., Thorud E., Jetne V., Conradi I.S., Retinopathy after low dose irradiation for an intracranial tumor of the frontal lobe. A case report, Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh), 1988, 66(1),65-68
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  52. Amoaku W.M., Archer D.B., Cephalic radiation and retinal vasculopathy, Eye (Lond). 1990, 4 ( Pt 1), 195-203
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  53. Parsons J.T., Bova F., Fitzgerald C.R. et al., Radiation retinopathy after external-beam irradiation: analysis of time-dose factors, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.,1994,30(4), 765-773
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  54. Wara W.M., Irvine A.R., Neger R.E. et al., Radiation retinopathy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys., 1979, 5(1), 81- 83
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  55. Krema H., Wei X., Payne D. et al., Factors predictive of radiation retinopathy post 125Iodine brachytherapy for uveal melanoma, Can J Ophthalmol., 2011, 46(2), 158-163
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  56. Kumar B., Palimar P., Accelerated radiation retinopathy in diabetes and pregnancy, Eye, 2000, 14(1), 107-108
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  57. Zamber R.W., Kinyoun J.L., Radiation retinopathy, West J Med., 1992, 157(5), 530-533
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  58. Gupta A., Dhawahir-Scala F., Smith A. et al., Radiation retinopathy: case report and review. BMC Ophthalmol., 2007, 7(1), 1-5
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  59. Archer D.B., Amoaku W.M.K., Gardiner T.A., Radiation retinopathy - clinical, histopathological, ultrastructural and experimental correlations, Eye, 1991, 5(2), 239-251
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  60. Groenewald C., Konstantinidis L., Damato B., Effects of radiotherapy on uveal melanomas and adjacent tissues. Eye. 2013, 27(2), 163-171
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  61. Archer D.B., Gardiner T.A., Ionizing radiation and the retina, Curr Opin Ophthalmol., 1994, 5(3), 59-65
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  62. Gorgoulis V.G., Zacharatos P., Kotsinas A. et al., p53 activates ICAM-1 (CD54) expression in an NF-kappaB- independent manner. EMBO J., 2003, 22(7 ), 1567-1578
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  63. Toutounchian J.J., Steinle J.J., Makena P.S. et al., Modulation of radiation injury response in retinal endothelial cells by quinic acid derivative KZ-41 involves p38 MAPK, PLoS One. 2014, 9(6), e100210
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  64. She Q.B., Chen N., Dong Z., ERKs and p38 kinase phosphorylate p53 protein at serine 15 in response to UV radiation, J Biol Chem., 2000, 275(27), 20444-20449
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  65. Sanchez-Prieto R., Rojas J.M., Taya Y., Gutkind J.S., A role for the p38 mitogen-acitvated protein kinase pathway in the transcriptional activation of p53 on genotoxic stress by chemotherapeutic agents, Cancer Res., 2000, 60(9), 2464-2472
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  66. Leung D.W., Cachianes G., Kuang W.J. et al., Vascular endothelial growth factor is a secreted angiogenic mitogen. Science, 1989, 246, 1306-1309
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  67. Ferrara N., Vascular endothelial growth factor: basic science and clinical progress, Endocr Rev., 2004, 25, 581- 611
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  68. Horgan N., Shields C.L., Mashayekhi A. et al., Early macular morphological changes following plaque radiotherapy for uveal melanoma, Retina, 2008, 28, 263-273
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  69. Missotten G.S., Notting I.C., Schlingemann R.O. et al., Vascular endothelial growth factor A in eyes with uveal melanoma, Arch Ophthalmol., 2006, 124, 1428-1434
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  70. Boyd S.R., Tan D., Bunce C. et al., Vascular endothelial growth factor is elevated in ocular fluids of eyes harbouring uveal melanoma: identification of a potential therapeutic window, Br J Ophthalmol., 2002, 86, 448- 452
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  71. Tamura H., Miyamoto K., Kiryu J. et al., Intravitreal injection of corticosteroid attenuates leukostasis and vascular leakage in experimental diabetic retina, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci., 2005, 46(4), 1440-1444
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  72. Takeda A., Yanai R., Murakami Y. et al., New Insights into Immunological Therapy for Retinal Disorders., Front Immunol., 2020, 11:1431
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  73. Noma H., Yasuda K., Shimura M., Involvement of Cytokines in the Pathogenesis of Diabetic Macular Edema, Int J Mol Sci., 2021, 22(7):3427
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  74. Forest A.P.M., Peebles Brown D.A. et al., Morris S.R. & Illingworth C.F.W., Pituitary radon implant for advanced cancer, Lancet, 1956, 270, 399-401
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  75. Lessell S., Friendly fire: neurogenic visual loss from radiation therapy., J Neuroophthalmol. 2004, 24(3), 243- 250
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  76. Kline L.B., Kim J.Y., Ceballos R., Radiation optic neuropathy. Ophthalmology, 1985 Aug,92(8), 1118-26
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  77. Danesh-Meyer H.V., Radiation-induced optic neuropathy, J Clin Neurosci., 2008, 15(2),95-100
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  78. Marks L.B., Ten Haken R.K., Martel M.K., Guest editor’s introduction to QUANTEC: users guide, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys., 2010, 76(3), S1-S2
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  79. Marks L.B., Yorke E.D., Jackson A. et al., Use of normal tissue complication probability models in the clinic, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys., 2010, 76(3 Suppl), S10-S19
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  80. Mayo C., Martel M.K., Marks L.B. et al., Radiation dose-volume effects of optic nerves and chiasm, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys., 2010, 76(3 Suppl), S28-S35
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  81. Wang W., Yang H., Guo L. et al., Radiation-induced optic neuropathy following external beam radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A retrospective case-control study, Mol Clin Oncol., 2016, 4(5), 868-872
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  82. Ferguson I., Huecker J., Huang J. et al., Risk factors for radiation-induced optic neuropathy: a case-control study, Clin Exp Ophthalmol., 2017, 45(6), 592-597
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  83. Archer Е.L., Liao, Е.A., Trobe, J.D., Radiation-Induced Optic Neuropathy: Clinical and Imaging Profile of Twelve Patients, Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology, 2019, 39(2), 170-180
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  84. Archer D.B., Amoaku W.M.K., Gardiner T.A., Radiation retinopathy - clinical, histopathological, ultrastructural and experimental correlations, Eye, 1991, 5(2), 239-251
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  85. Van Der Kogel A.J., Radiation-induced damage in the central nervous system: an interpretation of target cell responses, Br J Cancer, 1986, 53, 207-217
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  86. Myers R,, Rogers M.A,, Hornsey S., A reappraisal of the roles of glial and vascular elements in the development of white matter necrosis in irradiated rat spinal cord, Br J Cancer.,1986, 53, 221-223
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  87. Hopewell J.W., Van Der Kogel A.J., Pathophysiological mechanisms leading to the development of late radiation-induced damage to the central nervous system, Front RadiatTher Oncol., 1999, 33, 265-275
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  88. Lessell S., Friendly fire: neurogenic visual loss from radiation therapy J Neuroophthalmol., 2004, 24(3),243-250
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  89. Miller N.R., Radiation-induced optic neuropathy: still no treatment, Clin Exp Ophthalmol.,2004, 32(3), 233-235
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  90. Von Sallmann L., Further efforts to influence x-ray cataract by chemical agents, AMA. Arch. Ophthalmol., 1952, 48, 276-291
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  91. Kobayashi S., Kasuya M., Ishii Y. et al., Effects of 2-mercaptopropionylglycine on the development of X-ray- induced cataract in rats, Curr. Eye Res., 1992, 11, 1099-1103
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  92. Kobayashi S., Kasuya M., Shimizu K. et al., Glutathione isopropyl ester (YM737) inhibits the progression of X- ray-induced cataract in rats, Curr. Eye Res., 1993, 12, 115-122
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  93. Reddy V.N., Ikebe H., Giblin F.J. et al., Effect of radioprotective agents on X-ray cataracts, Lens Eye Toxic. Res., 1989, 6(4), 573-588
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  94. Mao X.W., Crapo J.D., Mekonnen T. et al., Radioprotective effect of a metalloporphyrin compound in rat eye model, Curr. Eye Res., 2009, 34(1), 62-72
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  95. Sasaki H., Lin L.R., Yokoyama T. et al., TEMPOL protects against lens DNA strand breaks and cataract in the x- rayed rabbit, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 1998, 39(3), 544-552
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  96. Sezen O., Ertekin M.V., Demircan B. et al., Vitamin E and L-carnitine, separately or in combination, in the prevention of radiation-induced brain and retinal damages, Neurosurg. Rev., 2008, 31(2), 205-213
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  97. Hagemann R.F., Evans T.C., Riley E.F., Modification of radiation effect on the eye by topical application of dimethyl sulfoxide, Radiat. Res., 1970, 44(2), 368-378
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  98. Davis J.G., Wan X.S., Ware J.H. et al., Dietary supplements reduce the cataractogenic potential of proton and HZE-Particle Radiation in Mice, Radiat. Res., 2010, 173(3), 353-361
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  99. Kodama T., Reddy V. N., Giblin F. et al., Scanning electron microscopy of X-ray-induced cataract in mice on normal and galactose diet, Ophthalmic Res., 1983, 15(6), 324-333
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  100. Bakri S.J., Beer P.M., Photodynamic therapy for maculopathy due to radiation retinopathy, Eye (Lond) 2005, 19, 795-799
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  101. Lee S.C., Song J.H., Chung E.J., Kwon O.W., Photodynamic therapy of subretinal neovascularization in radiation retinopathy, Eye (Lond) 2004, 18, 745-746
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  102. Chaudhuri P.R., Austin DAVIDJ, Rosenthal ARALPH, Treatment of radiation retinopathy, Br J Ophthalmol, 1981, 65(9), 623-625
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  103. Finger P.T., Kurli M., Laser photocoagulation for radiation retinopathy after ophthalmic plaque radiation therapy, Br J Ophthalmol. 2005, 89(6), 730-738
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  104. Kinyoun J.L., Zamber R.W., Lawrence B.S. et al., Photocoagulation treatment for clinically significant radiation macular oedema, Br J Ophthalmol, 1995, 79, 144-149
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  105. Hykin P.G., Shields C.L., Shields J.A., Arevalo J.F., The efficacy of focal laser therapy in radiation-induced macular edema, Ophthalmology 1998, 105, 1425-1429
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  106. Chiao T.B., Lee A.J., Role of pentoxifylline and vitamin E in attenuation of radiation-induced fibrosis, Ann Pharmacother., 2005, 39, 516-522
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  107. Gupta P., Meisenberg B., Amin P., Pomeranz H.D., Radiation retinopathy: The role of pentoxifylline, Retina, 2001, 21, 545-547
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  108. Shields C.L., Demirci H., Dai V. et al., Intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide for radiation maculopathy after plaque radiotherapy for choroidal melanoma, Retina, 2005, 25, 868-874
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  109. Sutter F.K., Gillies M.C., Intravitreal triamcinolone for radiation-induced macular edema, Arch Ophthalmol., 2003, 121, 1491-1493
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  110. Horgan N., Shields C.L., Mashayekhi A. et al., Periocular triamcinolone for prevention of macular edema after plaque radiotherapy of uveal melanoma: A randomized controlled trial. Ophthalmology, 2009, 116, 1383-1390
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  111. Stanford M.R., Retinopathy after irradiation and hyperbaric oxygen, J R Soc Med., 1984, 77, 1041-1043
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  112. Oguz H., Sobaci G., The use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in ophthalmology, Surv Ophthalmol., 2008, 53, 112- 120
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  113. Gall N., Leiba H., Handzel R., Pe'er J., Severe radiation retinopathy and optic neuropathy after brachytherapy for choroidal melanoma, treated by hyperbaric oxygen, Eye (Lond), 2007, 21, 1010-1012
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  114. Mason J.O., Albert M.A., Persaud T.O., Vail R.S., Intravitreal bevacizumab treatment for radiation macular edema after plaque radiotherapy for choroidal melanoma, Retina. 2007, 27(7), 903-907
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  115. Gupta A., Muecke J.S., Treatment of radiation maculopathy with intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (Avastin), Retina, 2008, 28(7), 964-968
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  116. Finger P.T., Chin K.J., High-dose (2.0 mg) intravitreal ranibizumab for recalcitrant radiation retinopathy, Eur J Ophthalmol., 2013, 23(6), 850-856
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  117. Schefler A.C., Fuller D., Anand R. et al. Randomized Trial of Monthly Versus As-Needed Intravitreal Ranibizumab for Radiation Retinopathy–Related Macular Edema: 1-Year Outcomes, Am J Ophthalmol., 2020, 216, 165-173
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  118. Horowitz S.A., Damasceno N.P., Damasceno E.F., Treatment of Radiation Retinopathy with Intravitreal Injection of Ranibizumab (Lucentis®), Int Med Case Rep J., 2020, 13, 27-32
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  119. Yu, H.J., Fuller, D., Anand, R. et al., Two-year results for ranibizumab for radiation retinopathy (RRR): a randomized, prospective trial. GraefesArch Clin Exp Ophthalmol., 260, 2022, 47-54
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  120. Fallico M., Reibaldi M., Avitabile T. et al., Intravitreal aflibercept for the treatment of radiation-induced macular edema after ruthenium 106 plaque radiotherapy for choroidal melanoma, Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol., 2019, 257(7), 1547-1554
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  121. Murray T.G., Latiff A., Villegas V.M., Gold A.S., Aflibercept for radiation maculopathy study: a prospective, randomized clinical study, Ophthalmol Retina, 2019, 3(7), 561-566
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  122. Tano Y., Chandler D., Machemer R., Treatment of intraocular proliferation with intravitreal injection of triamcinolone acetonide, Am J Ophthalmol., 1980, 90, 810-816
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  123. Matsuda S., Gomi F., Oshima Y. et al., Vascular endothelial growth factor reduced and connective tissue growth factor induced by triamcinolone in ARPE19 cells under oxidative stress, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2005, 46, 1062-1068
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  124. Zimmermann L., Kneifel C., Grajewski L. et al., Treatment of radiation-induced maculopathy with fluocinolone acetonide, Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol., 2020, Nov, 258(11), 2535-2539
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  125. Kaplan R.I., Chaugule S.S., Finger P.T., Intravitreal triamcinolone acetate for radiation maculopathy recalcitrant to high-dose intravitreal bevacizumab, British Journal of Ophthalmology, 2017, 101, 1694-1698
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  126. Russo A., Avitabile T., Uva M. et al., Radiation macular edema after Ru-106 plaque brachytherapy for choroidal melanoma resolved by an intravitreal dexamethasone 0.7-mg implant, Case Rep Ophthalmol., 2012, 3(1), 71-76
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  127. Baillif S., Maschi C., Gastaud P., Caujolle J.P., Intravitreal dexamethasone 0.7-mg implant for radiation macular edema after proton beam therapy for choroidal melanoma, Retina, 2013, 33(9), 1784-1790
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  128. Caminal J.M., Flores-Moreno I., Arias L. et al., Intravitreal dexamethasone implant for radiation maculopathy secondary to plaque brachytherapy in choroidal melanoma, Retina, 2015, 35(9), 1890-1897
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  129. Koc I., Kadayifcilar S., Kiratli H., Eldem B., Intravitreal dexamethasone (ozurdex) implant for radiation maculopathy secondary to stereotactic radiotherapy for posterior uveal melanoma, Retin Cases Brief Rep., 2019, 13(4), 352-356
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  130. Finger P.T., Kurli M., Laser photocoagulation for radiation retinopathy after ophthalmic plaque radiation therapy, Br J Ophthalmol., 2005 Jun, 89(6), 730-738
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  131. Shah S.U., Shields C.L., Bianciotto C.G. et al., Intravitreal bevacizumab at 4-month intervals for prevention of macular edema after plaque radiotherapy of uveal melanoma, Ophthalmology, 2014, 121(1), 269-275
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  132. Kim I.K., Lane A.M., Jain P. et al., Ranibizumab for the Prevention of Radiation Complications in Patients Treated With Proton Beam Irradiation for Choroidal Melanoma, Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc., 2016, Aug, 114:T2
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  133. Shields C.L., Dalvin L.A., Chang M. et al., Visual outcome at 4 years following plaque radiotherapy and prophylactic intravitreal bevacizumab (every 4 months for 2 years) for uveal melanoma: comparison with nonrandomized historical control individuals, JAMAOphthalmol., 2020, 138(2), 136-146
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar
  134. Seibel I., Vollhardt D., Riechardt A.I. et al. Influence of Ranibizumab versus laser photocoagulation on radiation retinopathy (RadiRet)-a prospective randomized controlled trial, Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol., 2020, 258(4), 869-878
    View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar

Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.

img

Virginia E. Koenig

Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.

img

Delcio G Silva Junior

Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.

img

Ziemlé Clément Méda

Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.

img

Mina Sherif Soliman Georgy

We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.

img

Layla Shojaie

The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.

img

Sing-yung Wu

Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.

img

Orlando Villarreal

Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.

img

Katarzyna Byczkowska

Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.

img

Anthony Kodzo-Grey Venyo

Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.

img

Pedro Marques Gomes

Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.

img

Bernard Terkimbi Utoo

This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.

img

Prof Sherif W Mansour

Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.

img

Hao Jiang

As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.

img

Dr Shiming Tang

Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.

img

Raed Mualem

International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.

img

Andreas Filippaios

Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.

img

Dr Suramya Dhamija

Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.

img

Bruno Chauffert

I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!

img

Baheci Selen

"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".

img

Jesus Simal-Gandara

I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.

img

Douglas Miyazaki

We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.

img

Dr Griffith

I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.

img

Dr Tong Ming Liu

I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.

img

Husain Taha Radhi

I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.

img

S Munshi

Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.

img

Tania Munoz

“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.

img

George Varvatsoulias

Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.

img

Rui Tao

Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.

img

Khurram Arshad

Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.

img

Gomez Barriga Maria Dolores

The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.

img

Lin Shaw Chin

Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.

img

Maria Dolores Gomez Barriga

Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.

img

Dr Maria Dolores Gomez Barriga

Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.

img

Dr Maria Regina Penchyna Nieto

Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.

img

Dr Marcelo Flavio Gomes Jardim Filho

Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”

img

Zsuzsanna Bene

Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner

img

Dr Susan Weiner