Study integrates chemical and physical effects for dose quantification in plasma medicine, suggesting improved treatment comparisons.
In plasma medicine and biological applications, plasmas typically deliver a complex combination of reactive chemical species and multiple physical energy components. However, establishing a unified and comparable dose metric to characterise their integrated biological effects remains a major challenge that continues to limit progress in this field. Although the Equivalent Total Oxidation Potential (ETOP) framework has been shown to effectively quantify biological effects dominated by reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS), a consistent and physically transparent dose definition for physical energy channels—such as electric fields and ultraviolet (UV) irradiation—has been lacking. In this work, explicit physical definitions are established for electric field and UV irradiation doses, together with strategies for mapping these doses onto a unified ETOP scale and determining their corresponding weighting coefficients. By reanalysing multiple sets of inactivation experiments under μs and ns‐pulsed electric fields as well as UV irradiation, we demonstrate that experimental results that are highly scattered when expressed in terms of operational parameters collapse onto a single sigmoidal dose–response curve when described using the proposed equivalent dose definitions. Furthermore, based on the principle of equivalent biological effect, chemical, electric field and UV doses are quantitatively mapped onto a common ETOP dose axis, enabling the extraction of weighting coefficients for different types of reactive components. The extended ETOP dose framework proposed here provides a physically grounded, experimentally accessible and scalable approach for the unified quantification of plasma dose under conditions where chemical and physical energy channels coexist. This framework lays a foundation for dose comparison across different treatment modalities, parameter transferability and further development of plasma dosimetry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: