1
|
Garibaldi C, Beddar S, Bizzocchi N, Tobias Böhlen T, Iliaskou C, Moeckli R, Psoroulas S, Subiel A, Taylor PA, Van den Heuvel F, Vanreusel V, Verellen D. Minimum and optimal requirements for a safe clinical implementation of ultra-high dose rate radiotherapy: A focus on patient's safety and radiation protection. Radiother Oncol 2024; 196:110291. [PMID: 38648991 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110291] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Revised: 03/28/2024] [Accepted: 04/16/2024] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Cristina Garibaldi
- IEO, Unit of Radiation Research, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.
| | - Sam Beddar
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Nicola Bizzocchi
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Till Tobias Böhlen
- Institute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne University Hospital and Lausanne University, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Charoula Iliaskou
- Division of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, 79106, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Raphaël Moeckli
- Institute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne University Hospital and Lausanne University, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Serena Psoroulas
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Anna Subiel
- National Physical Laboratory, Medical Radiation Science, Teddington, UK
| | - Paige A Taylor
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Frank Van den Heuvel
- Zuidwest Radiotherapeutisch Institute, Vlissingen, the Netherlands; Dept of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Verdi Vanreusel
- Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp University (Centre for Oncological Research, CORE), Antwerpen, Belgium; SCK CEN (Research in Dosimetric Applications), Mol, Belgium
| | - Dirk Verellen
- Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp University (Centre for Oncological Research, CORE), Antwerpen, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kaulfers T, Lattery G, Cheng C, Zhao X, Selvaraj B, Wu H, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Lin H, Simone CB, Hasan S, Kang M, Chang J. Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Bragg Peak Conformal FLASH in Prostate Cancer Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:798. [PMID: 38398188 PMCID: PMC10886659 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16040798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2023] [Revised: 01/29/2024] [Accepted: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Bragg peak FLASH radiotherapy (RT) uses a distal tracking method to eliminate exit doses and can achieve superior OAR sparing. This study explores the application of this novel method in stereotactic body radiotherapy prostate FLASH-RT. An in-house platform was developed to enable intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning using a single-energy Bragg peak distal tracking method. The patients involved in the study were previously treated with proton stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the pencil beam scanning (PBS) technique to 40 Gy in five fractions. FLASH plans were optimized using a four-beam arrangement to generate a dose distribution similar to the conventional opposing beams. All of the beams had a small angle of two degrees from the lateral direction to increase the dosimetry quality. Dose metrics were compared between the conventional PBS and the Bragg peak FLASH plans. The dose rate histogram (DRVH) and FLASH metrics of 40 Gy/s coverage (V40Gy/s) were investigated for the Bragg peak plans. There was no significant difference between the clinical and Bragg peak plans in rectum, bladder, femur heads, large bowel, and penile bulb dose metrics, except for Dmax. For the CTV, the FLASH plans resulted in a higher Dmax than the clinical plans (116.9% vs. 103.3%). For the rectum, the V40Gy/s reached 94% and 93% for 1 Gy dose thresholds in composite and single-field evaluations, respectively. Additionally, the FLASH ratio reached close to 100% after the application of the 5 Gy threshold in composite dose rate assessment. In conclusion, the Bragg peak distal tracking method can yield comparable plan quality in most OARs while preserving sufficient FLASH dose rate coverage, demonstrating that the ultra-high dose technique can be applied in prostate FLASH SBRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tyler Kaulfers
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11549, USA; (T.K.); (G.L.)
| | - Grant Lattery
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11549, USA; (T.K.); (G.L.)
| | - Chingyun Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA;
| | - Xingyi Zhao
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Balaji Selvaraj
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Hui Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou 450008, China;
| | - Arpit M. Chhabra
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Jehee Isabelle Choi
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Charles B. Simone
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Shaakir Hasan
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, 225 E 126th Street, New York, NY 10035, USA; (X.Z.); (B.S.); (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (H.L.); (S.H.)
| | - Jenghwa Chang
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11549, USA; (T.K.); (G.L.)
- Northwell, 2000 Marcus Ave, Suite 300, New Hyde Park, NY 11042, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Galts A, Hammi A. FLASH radiotherapy sparing effect on the circulating lymphocytes in pencil beam scanning proton therapy: impact of hypofractionation and dose rate. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:025006. [PMID: 38081067 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad144e] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 01/06/2024]
Abstract
Purpose. The sparing effect of ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) radiotherapy has been reported, but its potential to mitigate depletion of circulating blood and lymphocytes (CL) has not been investigated in pencil-beam scanning-based (PBS) proton therapy, which could potentially reduce the risk of radiation-induced lymphopenia.Material and methods. A time-dependent framework was used to score the dose to the CL during the course of radiotherapy. For brain patients, cerebral vasculatures were semi-automatic segmented from 3T MR-angiography data. A dynamic beam delivery system was developed capable of simulating spatially varying instantaneous dose rates of PBS treatment plans, and which is based on realistic beam delivery parameters that are available clinically. We simulated single and different hypofractionated PBS intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) FLASH schemes using 600 nA beam current along with conventionally fractionated IMPT treatment plan at 2 nA beam current. The dosimetric impact of treatment schemes on CL was quantified, and we also evaluated the depletion in subsets of CL based on their radiosensitivity.Results. The proton FLASH sparing effect on CL was observed. In single-fraction PBS FLASH, just 1.5% of peripheral blood was irradiated, whereas hypofractionated FLASH irradiated 7.3% of peripheral blood. In contrast, conventional fractionated IMPT exposed 42.4% of peripheral blood to radiation. PBS FLASH reduced the depletion rate of CL by 69.2% when compared to conventional fractionated IMPT.Conclusion. Our dosimetric blood flow model provides quantitative measures of the PBS FLASH sparing effect on the CL in radiotherapy for brain cancer. FLASH Single treatment fraction offers superior CL sparing when compared to hypofractionated FLASH and conventional IMPT, supporting assumptions about reducing risks of lymphopenia compared to proton therapy at conventional dose rates. The results also indicate that faster conformal FLASH delivery, such as passive patient-specific energy modulation, may further enhance the sparing of the immune system.
Collapse
|
4
|
Almeida A, Togno M, Ballesteros-Zebadua P, Franco-Perez J, Geyer R, Schaefer R, Petit B, Grilj V, Meer D, Safai S, Lomax T, Weber DC, Bailat C, Psoroulas S, Vozenin MC. Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:109953. [PMID: 37839557 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109953] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2023] [Revised: 10/07/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 10/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The FLASH effect has been validated in different preclinical experiments with electrons (eFLASH) and protons (pFLASH) operating at an average dose rate above 40 Gy/s. However, no systematic intercomparison of the FLASH effect produced by eFLASHvs. pFLASH has yet been performed and constitutes the aim of the present study. MATERIALS AND METHODS The electron eRT6/Oriatron/CHUV/5.5 MeV and proton Gantry1/PSI/170 MeV were used to deliver conventional (0.1 Gy/s eCONV and pCONV) and FLASH (≥110 Gy/s eFLASH and pFLASH) dose rates. Protons were delivered in transmission. Dosimetric and biologic intercomparisons were performed using previously validated dosimetric approaches and experimental murine models. RESULTS The difference between the average absorbed dose measured at Gantry 1 with PSI reference dosimeters and with CHUV/IRA dosimeters was -1.9 % (0.1 Gy/s) and + 2.5 % (110 Gy/s). The neurocognitive capacity of eFLASH and pFLASH irradiated mice was indistinguishable from the control, while both eCONV and pCONV irradiated cohorts showed cognitive decrements. Complete tumor response was obtained after an ablative dose of 20 Gy delivered with the two beams at CONV and FLASH dose rates. Tumor rejection upon rechallenge indicates that anti-tumor immunity was activated independently of the beam-type and the dose-rate. CONCLUSION Despite major differences in the temporal microstructure of proton and electron beams, this study shows that dosimetric standards can be established. Normal brain protection and tumor control were produced by the two beams. More specifically, normal brain protection was achieved when a single dose of 10 Gy was delivered in 90 ms or less, suggesting that the most important physical parameter driving the FLASH sparing effect might be the mean dose rate. In addition, a systemic anti-tumor immunological memory response was observed in mice exposed to high ablative dose of electron and proton delivered at CONV and FLASH dose rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Almeida
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - M Togno
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - P Ballesteros-Zebadua
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía MVS, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - J Franco-Perez
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía MVS, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - R Geyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - R Schaefer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - B Petit
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - V Grilj
- Institute of Radiation Physics (IRA)/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - D Meer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - S Safai
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - T Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - D C Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - C Bailat
- Institute of Radiation Physics (IRA)/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - S Psoroulas
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Marie-Catherine Vozenin
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Radiotherapy and Radiobiology sector, Radiation Therapy service, University hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Actis O, Mayor A, Meer D, Rechsteiner U, Bolsi A, Lomax AJ, Weber DC. A bi-directional beam-line energy ramping for efficient patient treatment with scanned proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:175001. [PMID: 37506707 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/acebb2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 07/28/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023]
Abstract
Objective.The treatment of mobile tumours using Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS) has become more prevalent in the last decade. However, to achieve the same beam delivery quality as for static tumours, treatments have to be combined with motion mitigation techniques, not limited but including, breath hold, gating and re-scanning, which typically prolong treatment time. In this article we present a novel method of bi-directional energy modulation and demonstrate our initial experience in improvement of treatment efficiency. Approach.At Paul Scherrer Institute Gantry 2 mobile tumours are treated by combining PBS with gating and volumetric re-scanning (VR), where the target volume is irradiated multiple times. Initial implementation of VR used only descending beam energies, creating a substantial dead time due to the beam-line initialization (ramping) before each re-scan. In 2019 we commissioned an energy meandering strategy that allows us to avoid beam line ramping in-between energy series while maintaining beam delivery quality.Main results.The measured beam parameters difference for both energy sequence are in the order of the typical daily variations: 0.2 mm in beam position and 0.2 mm in range. Using machine log files, we performed point-to-point dose difference calculations between original and new applications where we observed dose differences of less than 2%. After three years of operation employing bi-directional energy modulation, we have analysed the individual beam delivery time for 181 patients and have compared this to simulations of the timing behaviour assuming uni-directional energy sequence application. Depending on treatment complexity, we obtained plan delivery time reductions of up to 55%, with a median time gain of 17% for all types of treatments.Significance. Bi-directional energy modulation can help improving patient treatment efficiency by reducing delivery times especially for complex and specialised irradiations. It could be implemented in many existing facilities without significant additional hardware upgrades.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oxana Actis
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
| | - Alexandre Mayor
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
| | - David Meer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
| | - Urs Rechsteiner
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
| | | | - Antony John Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
- ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Damien Charles Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
- University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
- University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Zou W, Zhang R, Schüler E, Taylor PA, Mascia AE, Diffenderfer ES, Zhao T, Ayan AS, Sharma M, Yu SJ, Lu W, Bosch WR, Tsien C, Surucu M, Pollard-Larkin JM, Schuemann J, Moros EG, Bazalova-Carter M, Gladstone DJ, Li H, Simone CB, Petersson K, Kry SF, Maity A, Loo BW, Dong L, Maxim PG, Xiao Y, Buchsbaum JC. Framework for Quality Assurance of Ultrahigh Dose Rate Clinical Trials Investigating FLASH Effects and Current Technology Gaps. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 116:1202-1217. [PMID: 37121362 PMCID: PMC10526970 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2023] [Revised: 03/28/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
FLASH radiation therapy (FLASH-RT), delivered with ultrahigh dose rate (UHDR), may allow patients to be treated with less normal tissue toxicity for a given tumor dose compared with currently used conventional dose rate. Clinical trials are being carried out and are needed to test whether this improved therapeutic ratio can be achieved clinically. During the clinical trials, quality assurance and credentialing of equipment and participating sites, particularly pertaining to UHDR-specific aspects, will be crucial for the validity of the outcomes of such trials. This report represents an initial framework proposed by the NRG Oncology Center for Innovation in Radiation Oncology FLASH working group on quality assurance of potential UHDR clinical trials and reviews current technology gaps to overcome. An important but separate consideration is the appropriate design of trials to most effectively answer clinical and scientific questions about FLASH. This paper begins with an overview of UHDR RT delivery methods. UHDR beam delivery parameters are then covered, with a focus on electron and proton modalities. The definition and control of safe UHDR beam delivery and current and needed dosimetry technologies are reviewed and discussed. System and site credentialing for large, multi-institution trials are reviewed. Quality assurance is then discussed, and new requirements are presented for treatment system standard analysis, patient positioning, and treatment planning. The tables and figures in this paper are meant to serve as reference points as we move toward FLASH-RT clinical trial performance. Some major questions regarding FLASH-RT are discussed, and next steps in this field are proposed. FLASH-RT has potential but is associated with significant risks and complexities. We need to redefine optimization to focus not only on the dose but also on the dose rate in a manner that is robust and understandable and that can be prescribed, validated, and confirmed in real time. Robust patient safety systems and access to treatment data will be critical as FLASH-RT moves into the clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei Zou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Rongxiao Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
| | - Emil Schüler
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Paige A Taylor
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Eric S Diffenderfer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Tianyu Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Ahmet S Ayan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Manju Sharma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Shu-Jung Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Weiguo Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Walter R Bosch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Christina Tsien
- Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Murat Surucu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Julianne M Pollard-Larkin
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jan Schuemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Eduardo G Moros
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | | | - David J Gladstone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kristoffer Petersson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Stephen F Kry
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amit Maity
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Billy W Loo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Lei Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Peter G Maxim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Ying Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jeffrey C Buchsbaum
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Almeida A, Togno M, Ballesteros-Zebadua P, Franco-Perez J, Geyer R, Schaefer R, Petit B, Grilj V, Meer D, Safai S, Lomax T, Weber DC, Bailat C, Psoroulas S, Vozenin MC. Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams. BIORXIV : THE PREPRINT SERVER FOR BIOLOGY 2023:2023.04.20.537497. [PMID: 37131769 PMCID: PMC10153243 DOI: 10.1101/2023.04.20.537497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Abstract
Background and purpose The FLASH effect has been validated in different preclinical experiments with electrons (eFLASH) and protons (pFLASH) operating at a mean dose rate above 40 Gy/s. However, no systematic intercomparison of the FLASH effect produced by e vs. pFLASH has yet been performed and constitutes the aim of the present study. Materials and methods The electron eRT6/Oriatron/CHUV/5.5 MeV and proton Gantry1/PSI/170 MeV were used to deliver conventional (0.1 Gy/s eCONV and pCONV) and FLASH (≥100 Gy/s eFLASH and pFLASH) irradiation. Protons were delivered in transmission. Dosimetric and biologic intercomparisons were performed with previously validated models. Results Doses measured at Gantry1 were in agreement (± 2.5%) with reference dosimeters calibrated at CHUV/IRA. The neurocognitive capacity of e and pFLASH irradiated mice was indistinguishable from the control while both e and pCONV irradiated cohorts showed cognitive decrements. Complete tumor response was obtained with the two beams and was similar between e and pFLASH vs. e and pCONV. Tumor rejection was similar indicating that T-cell memory response is beam-type and dose-rate independent. Conclusion Despite major differences in the temporal microstructure, this study shows that dosimetric standards can be established. The sparing of brain function and tumor control produced by the two beams were similar, suggesting that the most important physical parameter driving the FLASH effect is the overall time of exposure which should be in the range of hundreds of milliseconds for WBI in mice. In addition, we observed that immunological memory response is similar between electron and proton beams and is independent off the dose rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Almeida
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - M Togno
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - P Ballesteros-Zebadua
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
- Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía MVS, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - J Franco-Perez
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
- Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía MVS, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - R Geyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - R Schaefer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - B Petit
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - V Grilj
- Institute of Radiation Physics (IRA)/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - D Meer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - S Safai
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - T Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - D C Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - C Bailat
- Institute of Radiation Physics (IRA)/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - S Psoroulas
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5323 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - M C Vozenin
- Laboratory of Radiation Oncology/Radiation Oncology Service/Department of Oncology/CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Motta S, Christensen JB, Togno M, Schäfer R, Safai S, Lomax AJ, Yukihara EG. Characterization of LiF:Mg,Ti thermoluminescence detectors in low-LET proton beams at ultra-high dose rates. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68. [PMID: 36696696 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/acb634] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2022] [Accepted: 01/25/2023] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Objective.This work aims at characterizing LiF:Mg,Ti thermoluminescence detectors (TLDs) for dosimetry of a 250 MeV proton beam delivered at ultra-high dose rates (UHDR). Possible dose rate effects in LiF:Mg,Ti, as well as its usability for dosimetry of narrow proton beams are investigated.Approach.LiF:Mg,Ti (TLD-100TMMicrocubes, 1 mm × 1 mm × 1 mm) was packaged in matrices of 5 × 5 detectors. The center of each matrix was irradiated with single-spot low-LET (energy >244 MeV) proton beam in the (1-4500) Gy s-1average dose rates range. A beam reconstruction procedure was applied to the detectors irradiated at the highest dose rate (Gaussian beam sigma <2 mm) to correct for volumetric averaging effects. Reference dosimetry was carried out with a diamond detector and radiochromic films. The delivered number of protons was measured by a Faraday cup, which was employed to normalize the detector responses.Main results.The lateral beam spread obtained from the beam reconstruction agreed with the one derived from the radiochromic film measurements. No dose rates effects were observed in LiF:Mg,Ti for the investigated dose rates within 3% (k= 1). On average, the dose response of the TLDs agreed with the reference detectors within their uncertainties. The largest deviation (-5%) was measured at 4500 Gy s-1.Significance.The dose rate independence of LiF:Mg,Ti TLDs makes them suitable for dosimetry of UHDR proton beams. Additionally, the combination of a matrix of TLDs and the beam reconstruction can be applied to determine the beam profile of narrow proton beams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Motta
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland.,Department of Physics, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - J B Christensen
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - M Togno
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - R Schäfer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - S Safai
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - A J Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland.,Department of Physics, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - E G Yukihara
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Held T, Franke H, Lang K, Eichkorn T, Regnery S, Weusthof K, Bauer L, Plath K, Dyckhoff G, Plinkert PK, Harrabi SB, Herfarth K, Debus J, Adeberg S. Intensity modulated proton therapy for early-stage glottic cancer: high-precision approach to laryngeal function preservation with exceptional treatment tolerability. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:199. [PMID: 36471398 PMCID: PMC9724307 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02144-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2022] [Accepted: 10/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Due to the increasing expertise in transoral laser surgery and image-guided radiation therapy, treatment outcomes have recently improved in patients with early-stage glottic cancer. The objective of the current study was to evaluate intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) as novel treatment option. METHODS A total of 15 patients with T1-2N0 glottic squamous cell carcinoma, treated between 2017 and 2020, were evaluated. Toxicity was recorded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.03. RESULTS The majority were T1a/b tumors (66.7%) and no patient had lymph node or distant metastases. The median total dose was 70 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) (range 66-70 Gy RBE). The one- and two-year OS and metastases-free survival were 100%. One patient developed local failure and received salvage laryngectomy. No higher-grade acute or late toxicity was reported. The mean number of CTCAE grade I and II overall toxicity events per patient was 4.1 (95%-[confidence interval] CI 3.1-5.3) and 1.0 (95%-CI 0.5-1.5). CONCLUSION High-precision proton therapy of T1-2N0 glottic cancer resulted in exceptional treatment tolerability with high rates of laryngeal function preservation and promising oncological outcome. IMPT has the potential to become a standard treatment option for patients with early-stage laryngeal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Held
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Henrik Franke
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristin Lang
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Tanja Eichkorn
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Katharina Weusthof
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lukas Bauer
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Karim Plath
- grid.7700.00000 0001 2190 4373Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Gerhard Dyckhoff
- grid.7700.00000 0001 2190 4373Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Peter K. Plinkert
- grid.7700.00000 0001 2190 4373Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi B. Harrabi
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Adeberg
- grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.488831.eHeidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.461742.20000 0000 8855 0365National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.5253.10000 0001 0328 4908Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany ,grid.7497.d0000 0004 0492 0584German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Togno M, Nesteruk KP, Schäfer R, Psoroulas S, Meer D, Grossmann M, Christensen JB, Yukihara EG, Lomax AJ, Weber DC, Safai S. Ultra-high dose rate dosimetry for pre-clinical experiments with mm-small proton fields. Phys Med 2022; 104:101-111. [PMID: 36395638 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.10.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2022] [Revised: 10/10/2022] [Accepted: 10/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To characterize an experimental setup for ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) proton irradiations, and to address the challenges of dosimetry in millimetre-small pencil proton beams. METHODS At the PSI Gantry 1, high-energy transmission pencil beams can be delivered to biological samples and detectors up to a maximum local dose rate of ∼9000 Gy/s. In the presented setup, a Faraday cup is used to measure the delivered number of protons up to ultra-high dose rates. The response of transmission ion-chambers, as well as of different field detectors, was characterized over a wide range of dose rates using the Faraday cup as reference. RESULTS The reproducibility of the delivered proton charge was better than 1 % in the proposed experimental setup. EBT3 films, Al2O3:C optically stimulated luminescence detectors and a PTW microDiamond were used to validate the predicted dose. Transmission ionization chambers showed significant volume ion-recombination (>30 % in the tested conditions) which can be parametrized as a function of the maximum proton current density. Over the considered range, EBT3 films, inorganic scintillator-based screens and the PTW microDiamond were demonstrated to be dose rate independent within ±3 %, ±1.8 % and ±1 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Faraday cups are versatile dosimetry instruments that can be used for dose estimation, field detector characterization and on-line dose verification for pre-clinical experiments in UHDR proton pencil beams. Among the tested detectors, the commercial PTW microDiamond was found to be a suitable option to measure real time the dosimetric properties of narrow pencil proton beams for dose rates up to 2.2 kGy/s.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Togno
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland.
| | - K P Nesteruk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - R Schäfer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - S Psoroulas
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - D Meer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - M Grossmann
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - J B Christensen
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - E G Yukihara
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - A J Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland; Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - D C Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - S Safai
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ramesh P, Gu W, Ruan D, Sheng K. Dose and dose rate objectives in Bragg peak and shoot-through beam orientation optimization for FLASH proton therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:7826-7837. [PMID: 36222217 PMCID: PMC9829523 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2021] [Revised: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 09/15/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The combined use of Bragg peak (BP) and shoot-through (ST) beams has previously been shown to increase the normal tissue volume receiving FLASH dose rates while maintaining dose conformality compared to conventional intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) methods. However, the fixed beam optimization method has not considered the effects of beam orientation on the dose and dose rates. To maximize the proton FLASH effect, here, we incorporate dose rate objectives into our beam orientation optimization framework. METHODS From our previously developed group-sparsity dose objectives, we add upper and lower dose rate terms using a surrogate dose-averaged dose rate definition and solve using the fast-iterative shrinking threshold algorithm. We compare the dosimetry for three head-and-neck cases between four techniques: (1) spread-out BP IMPT (BP), (2) dose rate optimization using BP beams only (BP-DR), (3) dose rate optimization using ST beams only (ST-DR), and (4) dose rate optimization using combined BP and ST (BPST-DR), with the goal of sparing organs at risk without loss of tumor coverage and maintaining high dose rate within a 10 mm region of interest (ROI) surrounding the clinical target volume (CTV). RESULTS For BP, BP-DR, ST-DR, and BPST-DR, CTV homogeneity index and Dmax were found to be on average 0.886, 0.867, 0.687, and 0.936 and 107%, 109%, 135%, and 101% of prescription, respectively. Although ST-DR plans were not able to meet dosimetric standards, BPST-DR was able to match or improve either maximum or mean dose in the right submandibular gland, left and right parotids, constrictors, larynx, and spinal cord compared to BP plans. Volume of ROIs receiving greater than 40 Gy/s ( V γ 0 ) ${V_{\gamma 0}})$ was 51.0%, 91.4%, 95.5%, and 92.1% on average. CONCLUSIONS The dose rate techniques, particularly BPST-DR, were able to significantly increase dose rate without compromising physical dose compared with BP. Our algorithm efficiently selects beams that are optimal for both dose and dose rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pavitra Ramesh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Wenbo Gu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Dan Ruan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Ke Sheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Lv Y, Lv Y, Wang Z, Lan T, Feng X, Chen H, Zhu J, Ma X, Du J, Hou G, Liao W, Yuan K, Wu H. FLASH radiotherapy: A promising new method for radiotherapy. Oncol Lett 2022; 24:419. [PMID: 36284652 PMCID: PMC9580247 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2022.13539] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2022] [Accepted: 08/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Among the treatments for malignant tumors, radiotherapy is of great significance both as a main treatment and as an adjuvant treatment. Radiation therapy damages cancer cells with ionizing radiation, leading to their death. However, radiation-induced toxicity limits the dose delivered to the tumor, thereby constraining the control effect of radiotherapy on tumor growth. In addition, the delayed toxicity caused by radiotherapy significantly harms the physical and mental health of patients. FLASH-RT, an emerging class of radiotherapy, causes a phenomenon known as the 'FLASH effect', which delivers radiotherapy at an ultra-high dose rate with lower toxicity to normal tissue than conventional radiotherapy to achieve local tumor control. Although its mechanism remains to be fully elucidated, this modality constitutes a potential new approach to treating malignant tumors. In the present review, the current research progress of FLASH-RT and its various particular effects are described, including the status of research on FLASH-RT and its influencing factors. The hypothetic mechanism of action of FLASH-RT is also summarized, providing insight into future tumor treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yinghao Lv
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Yue Lv
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Zhen Wang
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
- Laboratory of Liver Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Tian Lan
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Xuping Feng
- Laboratory of Liver Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Hao Chen
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Jiang Zhu
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Xiao Ma
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Jinpeng Du
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Guimin Hou
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Wenwei Liao
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Kefei Yuan
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
- Laboratory of Liver Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| | - Hong Wu
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
- Laboratory of Liver Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610000, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Gao Y, Liu R, Chang C, Charyyev S, Zhou J, Bradley JD, Liu T, Yang X. A potential revolution in cancer treatment: A topical review of FLASH radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2022; 23:e13790. [PMID: 36168677 PMCID: PMC9588273 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2022] [Revised: 07/08/2022] [Accepted: 09/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
FLASH radiotherapy (RT) is a novel technique in which the ultrahigh dose rate (UHDR) (≥40 Gy/s) is delivered to the entire treatment volume. Recent outcomes of in vivo studies show that the UHDR RT has the potential to spare normal tissue without sacrificing tumor control. There is a growing interest in the application of FLASH RT, and the ultrahigh dose irradiation delivery has been achieved by a few experimental and modified linear accelerators. The underlying mechanism of FLASH effect is yet to be fully understood, but the oxygen depletion in normal tissue providing extra protection during FLASH irradiation is a hypothesis that attracts most attention currently. Monte Carlo simulation is playing an important role in FLASH, enabling the understanding of its dosimetry calculations and hardware design. More advanced Monte Carlo simulation tools are under development to fulfill the challenge of reproducing the radiolysis and radiobiology processes in FLASH irradiation. FLASH RT may become one of standard treatment modalities for tumor treatment in the future. This paper presents the history and status of FLASH RT studies with a focus on FLASH irradiation delivery modalities, underlying mechanism of FLASH effect, in vivo and vitro experiments, and simulation studies. Existing challenges and prospects of this novel technique are discussed in this manuscript.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuan Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Ruirui Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Chih‐Wei Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Serdar Charyyev
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Jun Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Jeffrey D. Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Tian Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| | - Xiaofeng Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGeorgiaUSA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Wei S, Lin H, Isabelle Choi J, Shi C, Simone CB, Kang M. Advanced pencil beam scanning Bragg peak FLASH-RT delivery technique can enhance lung cancer planning treatment outcomes compared to conventional multiple-energy proton PBS techniques. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:238-247. [PMID: 35961583 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2022] [Revised: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the dosimetric characteristics between an advanced proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) Bragg peak FLASH technique and conventional PBS planning technique in lung tumors. To evaluate the "FLASHness" of single-field in a multiple-field delivery scheme for a hypofractionation regimen and move a step forward to clinical application. METHODS Single-energy PBS Bragg peak FLASH treatment plans were optimized based on a novel Bragg peak tracking technique to enable Bragg peaks to stop at the distal edge of the target. Inverse treatment planning using multiple-field optimization (MFO) can achieve sufficient FLASH dose rate and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT)-equivalent dosimetric quality. The dose rate of organs-at-risk (OARs) and the target were calculated under FLASH machine parameters. A group of 10 consecutive lung SBRT patients was optimized to 34 Gy/fraction using a standard treatment of PBS technique with multiple energy layers as references to the Bragg peak plans. The dosimetric quality was compared between Bragg peak FLASH and conventional plans based on RTOG0915 dose metrics. FLASH dose rate ratios (V40Gy/s) were calculated as a metric of the FLASH-sparing effect. RESULTS For higher dose thresholds, the Bragg peak plans achieved greater V40Gy/s FLASH coverage for all major OARs. The V40Gy/s was close to 100% for all OARs when the dose thresholds were > 5 Gy for full plan and single beam evaluations. The less "FLASHness" region was associated with a low dose distribution, mainly occurring in the PBS field penumbra region. The conventional IMPT treatment plans yielded slightly superior target dose uniformity with a D2%(%) of 108.02% versus that of Bragg peak 300 MU plans of 111.81% (p < 0.01) and that of Bragg peak 1200 MU plans of 115.95% (p < 0.01). No significant difference in dose metrics was found between Bragg peak and IMPT treatment plans for the spinal cord, esophagus, heart, or lung-GTV (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION Hypofractionated lung Bragg peak plans can maintain comparable plan quality to conventional PBS while achieving sufficient FLASH dose rate coverage for major OARs for each field under the multiple-field delivery scheme. The novel Bragg peak FLASH technique has the potential to enhance lung cancer planning treatment outcomes compared to standard PBS treatment techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA.
| | | | - Chengyu Shi
- City of Hope, Orange County, Irvine, CA 92618, USA
| | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Schneider T, Fernandez-Palomo C, Bertho A, Fazzari J, Iturri L, Martin OA, Trappetti V, Djonov V, Prezado Y. Combining FLASH and spatially fractionated radiation therapy: The best of both worlds. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:169-177. [PMID: 35952978 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2022] [Revised: 07/23/2022] [Accepted: 08/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
FLASH radiotherapy (FLASH-RT) and spatially fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT) are two new therapeutical strategies that use non-standard dose delivery methods to reduce normal tissue toxicity and increase the therapeutic index. Although likely based on different mechanisms, both FLASH-RT and SFRT have shown to elicit radiobiological effects that significantly differ from those induced by conventional radiotherapy. With the therapeutic potential having been established separately for each technique, the combination of FLASH-RT and SFRT could therefore represent a winning alliance. In this review, we discuss the state of the art, advantages and current limitations, potential synergies, and where a combination of these two techniques could be implemented today or in the near future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tim Schneider
- Institut Curie, Université PSL, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France; Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France
| | | | - Annaïg Bertho
- Institut Curie, Université PSL, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France; Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France
| | - Jennifer Fazzari
- Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 2, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
| | - Lorea Iturri
- Institut Curie, Université PSL, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France; Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France
| | - Olga A Martin
- Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 2, 3012 Bern, Switzerland; Division of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia; University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - Verdiana Trappetti
- Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 2, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
| | - Valentin Djonov
- Institute of Anatomy, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 2, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
| | - Yolanda Prezado
- Institut Curie, Université PSL, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France; Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation Radiobiologie et Cancer, 91400 Orsay, France.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Wei S, Lin H, Shi C, Xiong W, Chen CC, Huang S, Press RH, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Simone CB, Kang M. Use of single-energy proton pencil beam scanning Bragg peak for intensity-modulated proton therapy FLASH treatment planning in liver hypofractionated radiation therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:6560-6574. [PMID: 35929404 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2022] [Revised: 06/09/2022] [Accepted: 07/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The transmission proton FLASH technique delivers high doses to the normal tissue distal to the target, which is less conformal compared to the Bragg peak technique. To investigate FLASH RT planning using single-energy Bragg peak beams with a similar beam arrangement as clinical intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and to characterize the plan quality, dose sparing of organs-at-risk (OARs), and FLASH dose rate percentage. MATERIALS AND METHODS An in-house platform was developed to enable inverse IMPT-FLASH planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. A universal range shifter and range compensators were utilized to effectively align the Bragg peak to the distal edge of the target. Two different minimum MU settings of 400 and 800 MU/spot (Bragg-400MU and Bragg-800MU) plans were investigated on 10 consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients previously treated by IMPT-SBRT to evaluate the FLASH dose and dose rate coverage for OARs. The IMPT-FLASH using single-energy Bragg peaks delivered 50 Gy in 5 fractions with similar or identical beam arrangement to the clinical IMPT-SBRT plans. NRG GI003 dose constraint metrics were used. Three dose rate calculation methods, including average dose rate (ADR), dose threshold dose rate (DTDR), and dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), were all studied. RESULTS The novel spot map optimization can fulfill the inverse planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. All the Bragg peak FLASH plans achieved similar results for the liver-GTV Dmean and heart D0.5cc , compared to SBRT-IMPT. The Bragg-800MU plans resulted in 18.3% higher CTV D2cc compared with SBRT (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was found between Bragg-400MU and SBRT plans. For the CTV Dmax , SBRT plans resulted in 10.3% (p<0.01) less than Bragg-400MU plans and 16.6% (p<0.01) less than Bragg-800MU plans. The Bragg-800MU plans generally achieved higher ADR, DADR, and DTDR dose rates than Bragg-400MU plans, and DADR mostly led to the highest V40Gy/s compared to other dose rate calculation methods, whereas ADR led to the lowest. The lower dose rate portions in certain OARs are related to the lower dose deposited due to the farther distances from targets, especially in the penumbra of the beams. CONCLUSION Single-energy Bragg peak IMPT-FLASH plans eliminate the exit dose in normal tissues, maintaining comparable dose metrics to the conventional IMPT-SBRT plans while achieving a sufficient FLASH dose rate for liver cancers. This study demonstrates the feasibility of and sufficiently high dose rate when applying Bragg peak FLASH treatment for liver cancer hypofractionated FLASH therapy. The advancement of this novel method has the potential to optimize treatment for liver cancer patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Comparing radiolytic production of H 2O 2 and development of Zebrafish embryos after ultra high dose rate exposure with electron and transmission proton beams. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:197-202. [PMID: 35868604 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.07.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2022] [Revised: 06/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
The physico-chemical and biological response to conventional and UHDR electron and proton beams was investigated, along with conventional photons. The temporal structure and nature of the beam affected both, with electron beam at ≥1400 Gy/s and proton beam at 0.1 and 1260 Gy/s found to be isoefficient at sparing zebrafish embryos.
Collapse
|
18
|
Maradia V, van de Water S, Meer D, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Psoroulas S. Ultra-fast pencil beam scanning proton therapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancers: field delivery within a single breath-hold. Radiother Oncol 2022; 174:23-29. [PMID: 35788354 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.06.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Revised: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The use of motion mitigation techniques such as breath-hold can reduce the dosimetric uncertainty of lung cancer proton therapy. We studied the feasibility of pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy field delivery within a single breath-hold at PSI's Gantry 2. METHODS In PBS proton therapy, the delivery time for a field is determined by the beam-on time and the dead time between proton spots (the time required to change the energy and/or lateral position). We studied ways to reduce beam-on and lateral scanning time, without sacrificing dosimetric plan quality, aiming at a single field delivery time of 15 seconds at maximum. We tested this approach on 10 lung cases with varying target volumes. To reduce the beam-on time, we increased the beam current at the isocenter by developing new beam optics for PSI's PROSCAN beamline and Gantry 2. To reduce the dead time between the spots, we used spot-reduced plan optimization. RESULTS We found that it is possible to achieve conventional fractionated (2 Gy(RBE)/fraction) and hypofractionated (6 Gy(RBE)/fraction) field delivery times within a single breath-hold (<15 sec) for a variety non-small-cell lung cancer cases. CONCLUSION In summary, the combination of spot reduction and improved beam line transmission is a promising approach for the treatment of mobile tumours within clinically achievable breath-hold durations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivek Maradia
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Steven van de Water
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Damien C Weber
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland; University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - Antony J Lomax
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Karsch L, Pawelke J, Brand M, Hans S, Hideghéty K, Jansen J, Lessmann E, Löck S, Schürer M, Schurig R, Seco J, Szabó ER, Beyreuther E. Beam pulse structure and dose rate as determinants for the flash effect observed in zebrafish embryo. Radiother Oncol 2022; 173:49-54. [PMID: 35661675 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2022] [Revised: 05/20/2022] [Accepted: 05/26/2022] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Continuing recent experiments at the research electron accelerator ELBE at the Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf the influence of beam pulse structure on the Flash effect was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS The proton beam pulse structure of an isochronous cyclotron (UHDRiso) and a synchrocyclotron (UHDRsynchro) was mimicked at ELBE by quasi-continuous electron bunches at 13 MHz delivering mean dose rates of 287 Gy/s and 177 Gy/s and bunch dose rates of 106Gy/s and 109 Gy/s, respectively. For UHDRsynchro, 40 ms macro pulses at a frequency of 25 Hz superimposed the bunch delivery. For comparison, a maximum beam intensity (2.5 x 105 Gy/s mean and ∼109 Gy/s bunch dose rate) and a reference irradiation (of ∼8 Gy/min mean dose rate) were applied. Radiation induced changes were assessed in zebrafish embryos over four days post irradiation. RESULTS Relative to the reference a significant protecting Flash effect was observed for all electron beam pulse regimes with less severe damage the higher the mean dose rate of the electron beam. Accordingly, the macro pulsing induced prolongation of treatment time at UHDRsynchro regime reduces the protecting effect compared to the maximum regime delivered at same bunch but higher mean dose rate. The Flash effect of the UHDRiso regime was confirmed at a clinical isochronous cyclotron comparing the damage induced by proton beams delivered at 300 Gy/s and ∼9 Gy/min. CONCLUSION The recent findings indicate that the mean dose rate or treatment time are decisive for the normal tissue protecting Flash effect in zebrafish embryo.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonhard Karsch
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Jörg Pawelke
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Michael Brand
- Center for Regenerative Therapies TU Dresden (CRTD), and Cluster of Excellence 'Physics of Life', Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stefan Hans
- Center for Regenerative Therapies TU Dresden (CRTD), and Cluster of Excellence 'Physics of Life', Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Katalin Hideghéty
- ELI-ALPS, ELI-HU Non-Profit Ltd., Szeged, Hungary; Oncotherapy Department, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary
| | - Jeannette Jansen
- Division of Biomedical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Elisabeth Lessmann
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiation Physics, Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Schürer
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NCT/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Rico Schurig
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiation Physics, Dresden, Germany
| | - Joao Seco
- Division of Biomedical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Germany
| | | | - Elke Beyreuther
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiation Physics, Dresden, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Yang Y, Shi C, Chen CC, Tsai P, Kang M, Huang S, Lin CH, Chang FX, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Tome WA, Ii CBS, Lin H. A high spatiotemporal resolution 2D strip ionization chamber array for proton pencil beam scanning FLASH radiotherapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:5464-5475. [PMID: 35593052 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15706] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Revised: 04/18/2022] [Accepted: 05/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Experimental measurements of 2D dose rate distributions in proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) FLASH radiation therapy (RT) are currently lacking. In this study, we characterize a newly designed 2D strip-segmented ionization chamber array (SICA) with high spatial and temporal resolution and demonstrate its applications in a modern proton PBS delivery system at both conventional and ultra-high dose rates. METHODS A dedicated research beamline of the Varian ProBeam system was employed to deliver a 250 MeV proton PBS beam with nozzle currents up to 215 nA. In the research and clinical beamlines, the spatial, temporal, and dosimetric performance of the SICA was characterized and compared with measurements using parallel-plate ion chambers (IBA PPC05 and PTW Advanced Markus chamber), a 2D scintillator camera (IBA Lynx), Gafchromic films (EBT-XD), and a Faraday Cup. A novel reconstruction approach was proposed to enable the measurement of 2D dose and dose rate distributions using such a strip-type detector. RESULTS The SICA demonstrated a position accuracy of 0.12 ± 0.02 mm at a 20 kHz sampling rate (50 μs per event) and a linearity of R2 > 0.99 for both dose and dose rate with nozzle beam currents ranging from 1 nA to 215 nA. The 2D dose comparison to the film measurement resulted in a gamma passing rate of 99.8% (2 mm/2%). A measurement-based proton PBS 2D FLASH dose rate distribution was compared to simulation results and showed a gamma passing rate of 97.3% (2 mm/2%). CONCLUSIONS The newly designed SICA demonstrated excellent spatial, temporal, and dosimetric performance and is well suited for commissioning, quality assurance (QA), and a wide range of clinical applications in proton PBS clinical and FLASH radiotherapy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - J Isabelle Choi
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wolfgang A Tome
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Charles B Simone Ii
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Romano F, Bailat C, Jorge PG, Lerch MLF, Darafsheh A. Ultra‐high dose rate dosimetry: challenges and opportunities for FLASH radiation therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:4912-4932. [PMID: 35404484 PMCID: PMC9544810 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2021] [Revised: 02/03/2022] [Accepted: 02/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Romano
- Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare Sezione di Catania Catania Italy
| | - Claude Bailat
- Institute of Radiation Physics Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne University Switzerland
| | - Patrik Gonçalves Jorge
- Institute of Radiation Physics Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne University Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne Switzerland
- Radio‐Oncology Laboratory DO/CHUV Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne Switzerland
| | | | - Arash Darafsheh
- Department of Radiation Oncology Washington University School of Medicine St. Louis MO 63110 USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Kranzer R, Schüller A, Bourgouin A, Hackel T, Poppinga D, Lapp M, Looe HK, Poppe B. Response of diamond detectors in ultra-high dose-per-pulse electron beams for dosimetry at FLASH radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac594e] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2021] [Accepted: 02/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. With increasing investigation of the so-called FLASH effect, the need for accurate real time dosimetry for ultra-high dose rates is also growing. Considering the ultra-high dose-per-pulse (DPP) necessary to produce the ultra-high dose rates for investigations of the FLASH effect, real time dosimetry is a major challenge. In particular, vented ionization chambers, as used for dosimetry in conventional radiotherapy, show significant deviations from linearity with increasing DPP. This is due to recombination losses in the sensitive air volume. Solid state detectors could be an alternative. Due to their good stability of the response with regard to the accumulated dose, diamond detectors such as the microDiamond could be suitable here. The aims of this work are to investigate the response of microDiamond and adapted microDiamond prototypes in ultra-high DPP electron beams, to understand the underlying effects and to draw conclusions for further detector developments. Approach. For the study, an electron beam with a DPP up to 6.5 Gy and a pulse duration of 2.5 μs was used to fulfill the conditions under which the FLASH effect was observed. As a dose rate-independent reference, alanine dosimeters were used. Main Results. It has been shown that the commercially available microDiamond detectors have limitations in terms of linearity at ultra-high DPP. But this is not an intrinsic limitation of the detector principle. The deviations from linearity were correlated with the series resistance and the sensitivity. It could be shown that the linear range can be extended towards ultra-high DPP range by reducing the sensitivity in combination with a low series resistance of the detectors. Significance. The work shows that synthetic single crystal diamond detectors working as Schottky photodiodes are in principle suitable for FLASH-RT dosimetry at electron linear accelerators.
Collapse
|
23
|
Taylor PA, Moran JM, Jaffray DA, Buchsbaum JC. A roadmap to clinical trials for FLASH. Med Phys 2022; 49:4099-4108. [PMID: 35366339 PMCID: PMC9321729 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15623] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2021] [Revised: 02/17/2022] [Accepted: 03/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
While FLASH radiation therapy is inspiring enthusiasm to transform the field, it is neither new nor well understood with respect to the radiobiological mechanisms. As FLASH clinical trials are designed, it will be important to ensure we can deliver dose consistently and safely to every patient. Much like hyperthermia and proton therapy, FLASH is a promising new technology that will be complex to implement in the clinic and similarly will require customized credentialing for multi‐institutional clinical trials. There is no doubt that FLASH seems promising, but many technologies that we take for granted in conventional radiation oncology, such as rigorous dosimetry, 3D treatment planning, volumetric image guidance, or motion management, may play a major role in defining how to use, or whether to use, FLASH radiotherapy. Given the extended time frame for patients to experience late effects, we recommend moving deliberately but cautiously forward toward clinical trials. In this paper, we review the state of quality assurance and safety systems in FLASH, identify critical pre‐clinical data points that need to be defined, and suggest how lessons learned from previous technological advancements will help us close the gaps and build a successful path to evidence‐driven FLASH implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paige A Taylor
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jean M Moran
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, New York
| | - David A Jaffray
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jeffrey C Buchsbaum
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Guerrieri P, Jacob NK, Maxim PG, Sawant A, Van Nest SJ, Mohindra P, Dominello MM, Burmeister JW, Joiner MC. Three discipline collaborative radiation therapy (3DCRT) special debate: FLASH radiotherapy needs ongoing basic and animal research before implementing it to a large clinical scale. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2022; 23:e13547. [PMID: 35104025 PMCID: PMC8992943 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2022] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Patrizia Guerrieri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Bon Secours Mercy Health, Youngstown, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Peter G Maxim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Irvine, California, USA
| | - Amit Sawant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.,Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Samantha J Van Nest
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.,Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Jay W Burmeister
- Department of Oncology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.,Gershenson Radiation Oncology Center, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, Michigan, USA
| | - Michael C Joiner
- Department of Oncology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
A Universal Range Shifter and Range Compensator Can Enable Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Single-Energy Bragg Peak FLASH-RT Treatment Using Current Commercially Available Proton Systems. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:203-213. [PMID: 35101597 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Transmission beams have been proposed for ultra-high dose (or FLASH) proton planning, limiting the organ sparing potentials of proton therapy. By pulling back the ranges of the highest energy proton beams and compensating proton ranges to adapt to the target distally, the exit dose of proton beams can be eliminated to better protect organs at risk while still preserving FLASH dose rate delivery. METHOD AND MATERIALS An inverse planning tool was developed to optimize intensity modulated proton therapy using a single-energy layer for FLASH radiation therapy planning. The range pull-backs were calculated to stop single-energy proton beams at the distal edge of the target. The spot map and weights of each field were optimized to achieve a sufficient dose rate using proton beam Bragg peaks. A C-shape target in phantom, along with 6 consecutive lung cancer patients previously treated using proton stereotactic body radiation therapy were planned using this novel Bragg Peak method and also transmission technique. Dosimetry characteristics and 3-dimensional dose rate were investigated. RESULTS The minimum monitor units (MU) for transmission and Bragg peak plans were 400 MU/spot and 1200 MU/spot, respectively, corresponding to spot peak dose rates of 670 GyRBE (relative biological effectiveness) per second and 1950 GyRBE per second. Bragg peak plans yield a generally comparable target uniformity while significantly reducing dose spillage volume from the low to medium dose level. For all the 6 lung cases delivery of 34 GyRBE in 1 fraction, assessing Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0915 constraints, the lung V7GyRBE volume was reduced by up to 32% (P = .001) for Bragg peak plans. The transmission plans tended to generate 2.4% higher FLASH dose rate coverage (V40GyRBE/s) versus Bragg peak plans over the major organs at risk. However, Bragg peak plans could also reach the FLASH radiation therapy threshold of V40GyRBE/s using a higher MU/spot and sophisticated dose-rate optimization algorithm. CONCLUSIONS This first proof-of-concept study has demonstrated this novel method of combining range pull-back and powerful inverse optimization capable of achieving FLASH dose rate based on currently available machine parameters using a single-energy Bragg peak. Similar target coverage and uniformity can be maintained by Bragg peak FLASH plans while substantially improving the sparing of organs at risk compared with transmission plans.
Collapse
|
26
|
Wei S, Lin H, Choi JI, Press RH, Lazarev S, Kabarriti R, Hajj C, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Simone CB, Kang M. FLASH Radiotherapy Using Single-Energy Proton PBS Transmission Beams for Hypofractionation Liver Cancer: Dose and Dose Rate Quantification. Front Oncol 2022; 11:813063. [PMID: 35096620 PMCID: PMC8794777 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.813063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2021] [Accepted: 12/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This work aims to study the dose and ultra-high-dose rate characteristics of transmission proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) FLASH radiotherapy (RT) for hypofractionation liver cancer based on the parameters of a commercially available proton system operating under FLASH mode. METHODS AND MATERIALS An in-house treatment planning software (TPS) was developed to perform intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) FLASH-RT planning. Single-energy transmission proton PBS plans of 4.5 Gy × 15 fractions were optimized for seven consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients, using 2 and 5 fields combined with 1) the minimum MU/spot chosen between 100 and 400, and minimum spot time (MST) of 2 ms, and 2) the minimum MU/spot of 100, and MST of 0.5 ms, based upon considerations in target uniformities, OAR dose constraints, and OAR FLASH dose rate coverage. Then, the 3D average dose rate distribution was calculated. The dose metrics for the mean dose of Liver-GTV and other major OARs were characterized to evaluate the dose quality for the different combinations of field numbers and minimum spot times compared to that of conventional IMPT plans. Dose rate quality was evaluated using 40 Gy/s volume coverage (V40Gy/s). RESULTS All plans achieved favorable and comparable target uniformities, and target uniformity improved as the number of fields increased. For OARs, no significant dose differences were observed between plans of different field numbers and the same MST. For plans using shorter MST and the same field numbers, better sparing was generally observed in most OARs and was statistically significant for the chest wall. However, the FLASH dose rate coverage V40Gy/s was increased by 20% for 2-field plans compared to 5-field plans in most OARs with 2-ms MST, which was less evident in the 0.5-ms cases. For 2-field plans, dose metrics and V40Gy/s of select OARs have large variations due to the beam angle selection and variable distances to the targets. The transmission plans generally yielded inferior dosimetric quality to the conventional IMPT plans. CONCLUSION This is the first attempt to assess liver FLASH treatment planning and demonstrates that it is challenging for hypofractionation with smaller fractional doses (4.5 Gy/fraction). Using fewer fields can allow higher minimum MU/spot, resulting in higher OAR FLASH dose rate coverages while achieving similar plan quality compared to plans with more fields. Shorter MST can result in better plan quality and comparable or even better FLASH dose rate coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | | | | | - Carla Hajj
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Yap J, De Franco A, Sheehy S. Future Developments in Charged Particle Therapy: Improving Beam Delivery for Efficiency and Efficacy. Front Oncol 2021; 11:780025. [PMID: 34956897 PMCID: PMC8697351 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.780025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
The physical and clinical benefits of charged particle therapy (CPT) are well recognized. However, the availability of CPT and complete exploitation of dosimetric advantages are still limited by high facility costs and technological challenges. There are extensive ongoing efforts to improve upon these, which will lead to greater accessibility, superior delivery, and therefore better treatment outcomes. Yet, the issue of cost remains a primary hurdle as utility of CPT is largely driven by the affordability, complexity and performance of current technology. Modern delivery techniques are necessary but limited by extended treatment times. Several of these aspects can be addressed by developments in the beam delivery system (BDS) which determines the overall shaping and timing capabilities enabling high quality treatments. The energy layer switching time (ELST) is a limiting constraint of the BDS and a determinant of the beam delivery time (BDT), along with the accelerator and other factors. This review evaluates the delivery process in detail, presenting the limitations and developments for the BDS and related accelerator technology, toward decreasing the BDT. As extended BDT impacts motion and has dosimetric implications for treatment, we discuss avenues to minimize the ELST and overview the clinical benefits and feasibility of a large energy acceptance BDS. These developments support the possibility of advanced modalities and faster delivery for a greater range of treatment indications which could also further reduce costs. Further work to realize methodologies such as volumetric rescanning, FLASH, arc, multi-ion and online image guided therapies are discussed. In this review we examine how increased treatment efficiency and efficacy could be achieved with improvements in beam delivery and how this could lead to faster and higher quality treatments for the future of CPT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacinta Yap
- School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Andrea De Franco
- IFMIF Accelerator Development Group, Rokkasho Fusion Institute, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, Aomori, Japan
| | - Suzie Sheehy
- School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Wei S, Lin H, Choi JI, Simone CB, Kang M. A Novel Proton Pencil Beam Scanning FLASH RT Delivery Method Enables Optimal OAR Sparing and Ultra-High Dose Rate Delivery: A Comprehensive Dosimetry Study for Lung Tumors. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:5790. [PMID: 34830946 PMCID: PMC8616118 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13225790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2021] [Revised: 11/13/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE While transmission proton beams have been demonstrated to achieve ultra-high dose rate FLASH therapy delivery, they are unable to spare normal tissues distal to the target. This study aims to compare FLASH treatment planning using single energy Bragg peak proton beams versus transmission proton beams in lung tumors and to evaluate Bragg peak plan optimization, characterize plan quality, and quantify organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. MATERIALS AND METHODS Both Bragg peak and transmission plans were optimized using an in-house platform for 10 consecutive lung patients previously treated with proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). To bring the dose rate up to the FLASH-RT threshold, Bragg peak plans with a minimum MU/spot of 1200 and transmission plans with a minimum MU/spot of 400 were developed. Two common prescriptions, 34 Gy in 1 fraction and 54 Gy in 3 fractions, were studied with the same beam arrangement for both Bragg peak and transmission plans (n = 40 plans). RTOG 0915 dosimetry metrics and dose rate metrics based on different dose rate calculations, including average dose rate (ADR), dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), and dose threshold dose rate (DTDR), were investigated. We then evaluated the effect of beam angular optimization on the Bragg peak plans to explore the potential for superior OAR sparing. RESULTS Bragg peak plans significantly reduced doses to several OAR dose parameters, including lung V7.4Gy and V7Gy by 32.0% (p < 0.01) and 30.4% (p < 0.01) for 34Gy/fx plans, respectively; and by 40.8% (p < 0.01) and 41.2% (p < 0.01) for 18Gy/fx plans, respectively, compared with transmission plans. Bragg peak plans have ~3% less in DADR and ~10% differences in mean OARs in DTDR and DADR relative to transmission plans due to the larger portion of lower dose regions of Bragg peak plans. With angular optimization, optimized Bragg peak plans can further reduce the lung V7Gy by 20.7% (p < 0.01) and V7.4Gy by 19.7% (p < 0.01) compared with Bragg peak plans without angular optimization while achieving a similar 3D dose rate distribution. CONCLUSION The single-energy Bragg peak plans achieve superior dosimetry performances in OARs to transmission plans with comparable dose rate performances for lung cancer FLASH therapy. Beam angle optimization can further improve the OAR dosimetry parameters with similar 3D FLASH dose rate coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (S.W.); (H.L.); (J.I.C.); (C.B.S.II)
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Darafsheh A, Hao Y, Zhao X, Zwart T, Wagner M, Evans T, Reynoso F, Zhao T. Spread-out Bragg peak proton FLASH irradiation using a clinical synchrocyclotron: Proof of concept and ion chamber characterization. Med Phys 2021; 48:4472-4484. [PMID: 34077590 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2021] [Revised: 05/25/2021] [Accepted: 05/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this work is to (a) demonstrate the feasibility of delivering a spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) proton beam in ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) using a proton therapy synchrocyclotron as a major step toward realizing an experimental platform for preclinical studies, and (b) evaluate the response of four models of ionization chambers in such a radiation field. METHODS A clinical Mevion HYPERSCAN® synchrocyclotron was adjusted for ultra-high dose rate proton delivery. Protons with nominal energy of 230 MeV were delivered in pulses with temporal width ranging from 12.5 μs to 24 μs spanning from conventional to FLASH dose rates. A boron carbide absorber and a range modulator block were placed in the beam path for range modulation and creating an SOBP dose profile. The radiation field was defined by a brass aperture with 11 mm diameter. Two Faraday cups were used to determine the number of protons per pulse at various dose rates. The dosimetric response of two cylindrical (IBA CC04 and CC13) and two plane-parallel (IBA PPC05 and PTW Advanced Markus® ) ionization chambers were evaluated. The dose rate was measured using the plane-parallel ionization chambers. The integral depth dose (IDD) was measured with a PTW Bragg Peak® ionization chamber. The lateral beam profile was measured with EBT-XD radiochromic film. Monte Carlo simulation was performed in TOPAS as the secondary check for the measurements and as a tool for further optimization of the range modulators' design. RESULTS Faraday cups measurement showed that the maximum protons per pulse is 39.9 pC at 24 μs pulse width. A good agreement between the measured and simulated IDD and lateral beam profiles was observed. The cylindrical ionization chambers showed very high ion recombination and deemed not suitable for absolute dosimetry at ultra-high dose rates. The average dose rate measured using the PPC05 ionization chamber was 163 Gy/s at the pristine Bragg peak and 126 Gy/s at 1 cm depth for the SOBP beam. The SOBP beam range and modulation were measured 24.4 mm and 19 mm, respectively. The pristine Bragg peak beam had 25.6 mm range. Simulation results showed that the IDD and profile flatness can be improved by the cavity diameter of the range modulator and the number of scanned spots, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Feasibility of delivering protons in an SOBP pattern with >100 Gy/s average dose rate using a clinical synchrocyclotron was demonstrated. The dose heterogeneity can be improved through optimization of the range modulator and number of delivered spots. Plane-parallel chambers with smaller gap between electrodes are more suitable for FLASH dosimetry compared to the other ion chambers used in this work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arash Darafsheh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Yao Hao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Xiandong Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | | | | | | | - Francisco Reynoso
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Tianyu Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Winterhalter C, Togno M, Nesteruk KP, Emert F, Psoroulas S, Vidal M, Meer D, Weber DC, Lomax A, Safai S. Faraday cup for commissioning and quality assurance for proton pencil beam scanning beams at conventional and ultra-high dose rates. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [PMID: 33906166 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abfbf2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 04/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Recently, proton therapy treatments delivered with ultra-high dose rates have been of high scientific interest, and the Faraday cup (FC) is a promising dosimetry tool for such experiments. Different institutes use different FC designs, and either a high voltage guard ring, or the combination of an electric and a magnetic field is employed to minimize the effect of secondary electrons. The authors first investigate these different approaches for beam energies of 70, 150, 230 and 250 MeV, magnetic fields between 0 and 24 mT and voltages between -1000 and 1000 V. When applying a magnetic field, the measured signal is independent of the guard ring voltage, indicating that this setting minimizes the effect of secondary electrons on the reading of the FC. Without magnetic field, applying the negative voltage however decreases the signal by an energy dependent factor up to 1.3% for the lowest energy tested and 0.4% for the highest energy, showing an energy dependent response. Next, the study demonstrates the application of the FC up to ultra-high dose rates. FC measurements with cyclotron currents up to 800 nA (dose rates of up to approximately 1000 Gy s-1) show that the FC is indeed dose rate independent. Then, the FC is applied to commission the primary gantry monitor for high dose rates. Finally, short-term reproducibility of the monitor calibration is quantified within single days, showing a standard deviation of 0.1% (one sigma). In conclusion, the FC is a promising, dose rate independent tool for dosimetry up to ultra-high dose rates. Caution is however necessary when using a FC without magnetic field, as a guard ring with high voltage alone can introduce an energy dependent signal offset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Winterhalter
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.,Physics Department, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - M Togno
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - K P Nesteruk
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - F Emert
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - S Psoroulas
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - M Vidal
- Institut Mediterraneen de Protontherapie, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France
| | - D Meer
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - D C Weber
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.,Radiation Oncology Department of the University Hospital of Bern, Switzerland.,Radiation Oncology Department of the University Hospital of Zürich, Switzerland
| | - A Lomax
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.,Physics Department, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - S Safai
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|