1
|
Zhu Y, Pei X, Novaj A, Setton J, Bronder D, Derakhshan F, Selenica P, McDermott N, Orman M, Plum S, Subramanyan S, Braverman SH, McMillan B, Sinha S, Ma J, Gazzo A, Khan A, Bakhoum S, Powell SN, Reis-Filho JS, Riaz N. Large-scale copy number alterations are enriched for synthetic viability in BRCA1/BRCA2 tumors. Genome Med 2024; 16:108. [PMID: 39198848 PMCID: PMC11351199 DOI: 10.1186/s13073-024-01371-y] [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: 10/29/2023] [Accepted: 08/02/2024] [Indexed: 09/01/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutations contribute to hereditary breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. Paradoxically, bi-allelic inactivation of BRCA1 or BRCA2 (bBRCA1/2) is embryonically lethal and decreases cellular proliferation. The compensatory mechanisms that facilitate oncogenesis in bBRCA1/2 tumors remain unclear. METHODS We identified recurrent genetic alterations enriched in human bBRCA1/2 tumors and experimentally validated if these improved proliferation in cellular models. We analyzed mutations and copy number alterations (CNAs) in bBRCA1/2 breast and ovarian cancer from the TCGA and ICGC. We used Fisher's exact test to identify CNAs enriched in bBRCA1/2 tumors compared to control tumors that lacked evidence of homologous recombination deficiency. Genes located in CNA regions enriched in bBRCA1/2 tumors were further screened by gene expression and their effects on proliferation in genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 screens. A set of candidate genes was functionally validated with in vitro clonogenic survival and functional assays to validate their influence on proliferation in the setting of bBRCA1/2 mutations. RESULTS We found that bBRCA1/2 tumors harbor recurrent large-scale genomic deletions significantly more frequently than histologically matched controls (n = 238 cytobands in breast and ovarian cancers). Within the deleted regions, we identified 277 BRCA1-related genes and 218 BRCA2-related genes that had reduced expression and increased proliferation in bBRCA1/2 but not in wild-type cells in genome-wide CRISPR screens. In vitro validation of 20 candidate genes with clonogenic proliferation assays validated 9 genes, including RIC8A and ATMIN (ATM-Interacting protein). We identified loss of RIC8A, which occurs frequently in both bBRCA1/2 tumors and is synthetically viable with loss of both BRCA1 and BRCA2. Furthermore, we found that metastatic homologous recombination deficient cancers acquire loss-of-function mutations in RIC8A. Lastly, we identified that RIC8A does not rescue homologous recombination deficiency but may influence mitosis in bBRCA1/2 tumors, potentially leading to increased micronuclei formation. CONCLUSIONS This study provides a means to solve the tumor suppressor paradox by identifying synthetic viability interactions and causal driver genes affected by large-scale CNAs in human cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yingjie Zhu
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Xin Pei
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ardijana Novaj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jeremy Setton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel Bronder
- Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Fatemeh Derakhshan
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Present address: Department of Pathology & Cell Biology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Pier Selenica
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Niamh McDermott
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mehmet Orman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sarina Plum
- Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Shyamal Subramanyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sara H Braverman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Biko McMillan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sonali Sinha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrea Gazzo
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Atif Khan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samuel Bakhoum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Simon N Powell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jorge S Reis-Filho
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Nadeem Riaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Correia D, Indelicato DJ, Paulino AC, Ermoian R, Mihalcik S, Perkins SM, Hill-Kayser C, Mangona VS, Lee J, Chang JHC, Laack NN, Kwok Y, Perentesis J, Vatner R, Dave R, Gallotto SL, Lawell MP, Bajaj BVM, Allison KW, Perry A, Yock TI. Evolution of Proton Radiation Therapy Brainstem Constraints on the Pediatric Proton/Photon Consortium Registry. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024:S1879-8500(24)00194-2. [PMID: 39128543 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2024.05.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2024] [Revised: 05/22/2024] [Accepted: 05/28/2024] [Indexed: 08/13/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Increasing concern that brainstem toxicity incidence after proton radiation therapy might be higher than with photons led to a 2014 University of Florida (UF) landmark paper identifying its risk factors and proposing more conservative dose constraints. We evaluated how practice patterns changed among the Pediatric Proton/Photon Consortium Registry (PPCR). MATERIAL AND METHODS This prospective multicenter cohort study gathered data from patients under the age of 22 years enrolled on the PPCR, treated between 2002 and 2019 for primary posterior fossa brain tumors. After standardizing brainstem contours, we garnered dosimetry data and correlated those meeting the 2014 proton-specific brainstem constraint guidelines by treatment era, histology, and extent of surgical resection. RESULTS A total of 467 patients with evaluable proton radiation therapy plans were reviewed. Median age was 7.1 years (range: <1-21.9), 63.0% (n = 296) were men, 76.0% (n = 357) were White, and predominant histology was medulloblastoma (55.0%, n = 256), followed by ependymoma (27.0%, n = 125). Extent of resection was mainly gross total resection (GTR) (67.0%, n = 312), followed by subtotal resection (STR) or biopsy (20.0%, n = 92), and near total resection (NTR) (9.2%, n = 43). The UF brainstem constraint metrics most often exceeded were the goal D50% of 52.4 gray relative biological equivalents (43.3%, n = 202) and maximal D50% of 54 gray relative biological equivalents (12.6%, n = 59). The compliance rate increased after the new guidelines (2002-2014: 64.0% vs 2015-2019: 74.6%, P = .02), except for ependymoma (46.3% pre- vs 50.0% post-guidelines, P = .86), presenting lower compliance (48.8%) in comparison to medulloblastoma/ primitive neuroectodermal tumors/pineoblastoma (77.7%), glioma (89.1%), and atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumors (90.9%) (P < .001). Degree of surgical resection did not affect compliance rates (GTR/NTR 71.0% vs STR/biopsy 72.8%, P = .45), even within the ependymoma subset (GTR/NTR 50.5% vs STR/biopsy 38.1%, P = .82). CONCLUSION Since the publication of the UF guidelines, the pediatric proton community has implemented more conservative brainstem constraints in all patients except those with ependymoma, irrespective of residual disease after surgery. Future work will evaluate if this change in practice is associated with decreased rates of brainstem toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dora Correia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Aarau, Aargau, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland.
| | - Daniel J Indelicato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Arnold C Paulino
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ralph Ermoian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Stephen Mihalcik
- Northwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, Warrenville, Illinois
| | - Stephanie M Perkins
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Christine Hill-Kayser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Victor S Mangona
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Texas Center for Proton Therapy, Irving, Texas
| | - Jae Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Franklin Township, New Jersey
| | - John Han-Chih Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Oklahoma Proton Center and University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - Nadia N Laack
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Young Kwok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - John Perentesis
- Division of Oncology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Ralph Vatner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati and Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Ronak Dave
- Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia; Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Sara L Gallotto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Miranda P Lawell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Benjamin V M Bajaj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Keith W Allison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alisa Perry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Torunn I Yock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Paganetti H, Simone CB, Bosch WR, Haas-Kogan D, Kirsch DG, Li H, Liang X, Liu W, Mahajan A, Story MD, Taylor PA, Willers H, Xiao Y, Buchsbaum JC. NRG Oncology White Paper on the Relative Biological Effectiveness in Proton Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)02974-2. [PMID: 39059509 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.07.2152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2024] [Revised: 06/17/2024] [Accepted: 07/06/2024] [Indexed: 07/28/2024]
Abstract
This position paper, led by the NRG Oncology Particle Therapy Work Group, focuses on the concept of relative biologic effect (RBE) in clinical proton therapy (PT), with the goal of providing recommendations for the next-generation clinical trials with PT on the best practice of investigating and using RBE, which could deviate from the current standard proton RBE value of 1.1 relative to photons. In part 1, current clinical utilization and practice are reviewed, giving the context and history of RBE. Evidence for variation in RBE is presented along with the concept of linear energy transfer (LET). The intertwined nature of tumor radiobiology, normal tissue constraints, and treatment planning with LET and RBE considerations is then reviewed. Part 2 summarizes current and past clinical data and then suggests the next steps to explore and employ tools for improved dynamic models for RBE. In part 3, approaches and methods for the next generation of prospective clinical trials are explored, with the goal of optimizing RBE to be both more reflective of clinical reality and also deployable in trials to allow clinical validation and interpatient comparisons. These concepts provide the foundation for personalized biologic treatments reviewed in part 4. Finally, we conclude with a summary including short- and long-term scientific focus points for clinical PT. The practicalities and capacity to use RBE in treatment planning are reviewed and considered with more biological data in hand. The intermediate step of LET optimization is summarized and proposed as a potential bridge to the ultimate goal of case-specific RBE planning that can be achieved as a hypothesis-generating tool in near-term proton trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Charles B Simone
- New York Proton Center, New York, New York; Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Walter R Bosch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Daphne Haas-Kogan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David G Kirsch
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Anita Mahajan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Michael D Story
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | - Henning Willers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ying Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jeffrey C Buchsbaum
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cooper BT, Mayo CS, Milano MT, Olch AJ, Oh C, Keating GF, Hallstrom A, Constine LS, Laack NN. Predictive Factors Associated With Radiation Myelopathy in Pediatric Patients With Cancer: A PENTEC Comprehensive Review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:494-506. [PMID: 38323945 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.12.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2023] [Revised: 12/06/2023] [Accepted: 12/15/2023] [Indexed: 02/08/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Radiation myelitis (RM) is a rare complication of radiation therapy (RT). The Pediatric Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic spinal cord task force aimed to identify RT dose effects and assess risk factors for RM in children. Through systematic review, we analyzed RT dose, fraction size, latency between completion of RT and toxicity, chemotherapy use, age when irradiated, and sex. METHODS AND MATERIALS We conducted literature searches of peer-reviewed manuscripts published from 1964 to June 2017 evaluating RM among children. Normality of variables was assessed with Kolmogorov-Smirnov or Shapiro-Wilk tests. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were used to test correlations between RT dose/fraction size and latency between RT and development of toxicity. RESULTS Of 1329 identified and screened reports, 144 reports were fully reviewed and determined to have adequate data for analysis; 16 of these reports had a total of 33 cases of RM with a median age of 13 years (range, 0.2-18) at the time of RT. The most common primary tumor histologies were rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 9), medulloblastoma (n = 5), and Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 2); the most common chemotherapy agents given were vincristine (n = 15), intrathecal methotrexate (n = 12), and intrathecal cytarabine (n = 10). The median RT dose and fraction size were 40 Gy (range, 24-57.4 Gy) and 1.8 Gy (range, 1.3-2.6 Gy), respectively. RT dose resulting in RM in patients who also received chemotherapy was lower than in those not receiving chemotherapy (mean 39.6 vs 49.7 Gy; P = .04). There was no association of age with RT dose. The median latency period was 7 months (range, 1-29). Higher RT dose was correlated with longer latency periods (P = .03) to RM whereas sex, age, fraction size, and chemotherapy use were not. Two of 17 patients with adequate follow-up recovered from RM; unfortunately, it was fatal in 6 of 15 evaluable patients. Complication probability modeling was not possible because of the rarity of events. CONCLUSIONS This report demonstrates a relatively short latency from RT (with or without chemotherapy) to RM and a wide range of doses (including fraction sizes) associated with RM. No apparent association with age at the time of RT could be discerned. Chemotherapy appears to reduce spinal cord tolerance. Recovery from RM is rare, and it is often fatal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin T Cooper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Langone School of Medicine, New York, New York.
| | - Charles S Mayo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Michael T Milano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| | - Arthur J Olch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Cheongeun Oh
- Department of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, New York, New York
| | | | - Anneka Hallstrom
- Department of Physics, Wellesley College, Wellesley, Massachusetts
| | - Louis S Constine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| | - Nadia N Laack
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Holtzman AL, Mohammadi H, Furutani KM, Koffler DM, McGee LA, Lester SC, Gamez ME, Routman DM, Beltran CJ, Liang X. Impact of Relative Biologic Effectiveness for Proton Therapy for Head and Neck and Skull-Base Tumors: A Technical and Clinical Review. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1947. [PMID: 38893068 PMCID: PMC11171304 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16111947] [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: 05/02/2024] [Revised: 05/17/2024] [Accepted: 05/18/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy has emerged as a crucial tool in the treatment of head and neck and skull-base cancers, offering advantages over photon therapy in terms of decreasing integral dose and reducing acute and late toxicities, such as dysgeusia, feeding tube dependence, xerostomia, secondary malignancies, and neurocognitive dysfunction. Despite its benefits in dose distribution and biological effectiveness, the application of proton therapy is challenged by uncertainties in its relative biological effectiveness (RBE). Overcoming the challenges related to RBE is key to fully realizing proton therapy's potential, which extends beyond its physical dosimetric properties when compared with photon-based therapies. In this paper, we discuss the clinical significance of RBE within treatment volumes and adjacent serial organs at risk in the management of head and neck and skull-base tumors. We review proton RBE uncertainties and its modeling and explore clinical outcomes. Additionally, we highlight technological advancements and innovations in plan optimization and treatment delivery, including linear energy transfer/RBE optimizations and the development of spot-scanning proton arc therapy. These advancements show promise in harnessing the full capabilities of proton therapy from an academic standpoint, further technological innovations and clinical outcome studies, however, are needed for their integration into routine clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam L. Holtzman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Homan Mohammadi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Keith M. Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Daniel M. Koffler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Lisa A. McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Scott C. Lester
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Mauricio E. Gamez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - David M. Routman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Chris J. Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Eichkorn T, Lischalk JW, Schwarz R, Bauer L, Deng M, Regnery S, Jungk C, Hörner-Rieber J, Herfarth K, König L, Debus J. Radiation-Induced Cerebral Contrast Enhancements Strongly Share Ischemic Stroke Risk Factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1192-1205. [PMID: 38237810 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.12.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2023] [Revised: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 12/31/2023] [Indexed: 03/18/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Radiation-induced cerebral contrast enhancements (RICE) are frequent after photon and particularly proton radiation therapy and are associated with a significant risk for neurologic morbidity. Nevertheless, risk factors are poorly understood. A more robust understanding of RICE risk factors is crucial to improve management and offer adaptive therapy at the outset and during follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS We analyzed the comorbidities in detail of 190 consecutive adult patients treated at a single European national comprehensive cancer center with proton radiation therapy (54 Gy relative biological effectiveness) for LGG from 2010 to 2020 who were followed with serial clinical examinations and magnetic resonance imaging for a median 5.6 years. RESULTS Classical vascular risk factors including age (≥50 vs <50 years: 1.6-fold; P = .0024), hypertension (2.7-fold; P = .00012), and diabetes (11.7-fold; P = .0066) were observed more frequently in the cohort that developed RICE. Dyslipidemia (2.1-fold), being overweight (2.0-fold), and smoking (2.6-fold), as well as history of previous stroke (1.7-fold), were also more frequently observed in the RICE cohort, although these factors did not reach the threshold for significance. Multivariable regression modeling supported the influence of age (P = .05), arterial hypertension (P = .01), and potentially male sex (P = .02), diabetes (P = .0008), and smoking (P = .001) on RICE occurrence over time, independent of each other and further vascular risk factors. If RICE occurred, bevacizumab treatment was 2-fold more frequently needed in the cohort with vascular risk factors, but RICE long-term prognosis did not differ between the RICE subcohorts with and without vascular risk factors. CONCLUSIONS This is the first report in the literature demonstrating that RICE strongly shares vascular risk factors with ischemic stroke, which further enhances the nebulous understanding of the multifactorial pathophysiology of RICE. Classical vascular risk factors, especially age, hypertension, and diabetes, clearly correlated independently with RICE risk. Risk-adapted screening and management for RICE can be directly derived from these data to assist in clinical management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, New York
| | - Robert Schwarz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lena Bauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Maximilian Deng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Jungk
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Wu XY, Chen M, Cao L, Li M, Chen JY. Proton Therapy in Breast Cancer: A Review of Potential Approaches for Patient Selection. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2024; 23:15330338241234788. [PMID: 38389426 PMCID: PMC10894553 DOI: 10.1177/15330338241234788] [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: 09/06/2023] [Revised: 11/25/2023] [Accepted: 02/06/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton radiotherapy may be a compelling technical option for the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical property known as the "Bragg peak." This feature offers distinct advantages, promising superior dose conformity within the tumor area and reduced radiation exposure to surrounding healthy tissues, enhancing the potential for better treatment outcomes. However, proton therapy is accompanied by inherent challenges, primarily higher costs and limited accessibility when compared to well-developed photon irradiation. Thus, in clinical practice, it is important for radiation oncologists to carefully select patients before recommendation of proton therapy to ensure the transformation of dosimetric benefits into tangible clinical benefits. Yet, the optimal indications for proton therapy in breast cancer patients remain uncertain. While there is no widely recognized methodology for patient selection, numerous attempts have been made in this direction. In this review, we intended to present an inspiring summarization and discussion about the current practices and exploration on the approaches of this treatment decision-making process in terms of treatment-related side-effects, tumor control, and cost-efficiency, including the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model, the tumor control probability (TCP) model, genomic biomarkers, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), and so on. Additionally, we conducted an evaluation of the eligibility criteria in ongoing randomized controlled trials and analyzed their reference value in patient selection. We evaluated the pros and cons of various potential patient selection approaches and proposed possible directions for further optimization and exploration. In summary, while proton therapy holds significant promise in breast cancer treatment, its integration into clinical practice calls for a thoughtful, evidence-driven strategy. By continuously refining the patient selection criteria, we can harness the full potential of proton radiotherapy while ensuring maximum benefit for breast cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiao-Yu Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Mei Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Lu Cao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Min Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Jia-Yi Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Alexander GS, Pollock AE, Arons D, Ferris MJ, Molitoris JK, Regine WF, Witek ME. Post-treatment PET/CT for p16-positive oropharynx cancer treated with definitive proton therapy. J Clin Imaging Sci 2023; 13:31. [PMID: 37810180 PMCID: PMC10559439 DOI: 10.25259/jcis_74_2023] [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: 07/19/2023] [Accepted: 09/07/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives Given emerging data suggesting that uncertainty in the relative biologic effectiveness at the distal end of the Bragg peak results in increased mucosal injury in patients with oropharynx cancer receiving adjuvant proton therapy, we evaluated the results of post-treatment positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with p16-positive oropharynx cancer (p16+OPC) treated with definitive intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Material and Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients with p16+OPC treated with definitive IMPT between 2016 and 2022 was performed at a single institution. Patients with PET/CT scans within 6 months following completion of IMPT were included in the study. Positive post-treatment scans were defined by a maximum standard uptake values (SUVmax) >4.0 or a <65% reduction in SUVmax in either the primary tumor or lymph node. The Fisher's exact test was used to evaluate factors associated with positive post-treatment PET/ CT values. Results Sixty-two patients were included for analysis. Median follow-up was 21 months (range: 3-71 months) with a median time to post-treatment PET/CT of 3 months (range: 2-6 months). Median post-treatment SUVmax of the primary disease and nodal disease was 0 (mean: 0.8, range: 0-7.7) and 0 (mean: 0.7, range: 0-9.5), respectively. Median post-treatment percent reduction in SUVmax for the primary site and lymph node was 100% (mean: 94%, range: 31.3-100%) and 100% (mean: 89%, range: 23-100%), respectively. Eleven patients had a positive post-treatment PET/CT with one biopsy-proven recurrence. Negative and positive predictive values (NPV and PPV) were 98% and 9.1%, respectively. There were no factors associated with positive post-treatment PET/CT. Conclusion Similar to patients treated with photon-based radiation therapy, post-treatment PET/CT has a high NPV for patients with p16+OPC treated with definitive proton therapy and should be used to guide patient management. Additional patients and more events are needed to confirm the PPV of a post-treatment PET/CT in this favorable patient cohort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory S. Alexander
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - Ariel Eve Pollock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - Danielle Arons
- School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - Matthew J. Ferris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - Jason K. Molitoris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - William F. Regine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - Matthew E. Witek
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Audouin J, Hofverberg P, Ngono-Ravache Y, Desorgher L, Baldacchino G. Intermediate LET-like effect in distal part of proton Bragg peak revealed by track-ends imaging during super-Fricke radiolysis. Sci Rep 2023; 13:15460. [PMID: 37726376 PMCID: PMC10509149 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-42639-4] [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: 03/29/2023] [Accepted: 09/13/2023] [Indexed: 09/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Upstream of the efficiency of proton or carbon ion beams in cancer therapy, and to optimize hadrontherapy results, we analysed the chemistry of Fricke solutions in track-end of 64-MeV protons and 1.14-GeV carbon ions. An original optical setup is designed to determine the primary track-segment yields along the last millimetres of the ion track with a sub-millimetre resolution. The Fe3+-yield falls in the Bragg peak to (4.9 ± 0.4) × 10-7 mol/J and 1.9 × 10-7 mol/J, under protons and carbon ions respectively. Beyond the Bragg peak, a yield recovery is observed over 1 mm for proton beams. It is attributed to the intermediate-LET of protons in this region where their energy decreases and energy distribution becomes broader, in relation with the longitudinal straggling of the beam. Consequently to this LET decrease in the distal part of the Bragg peak, Fe3+-yield increases. For the first time, this signature is highlighted at the chemical level under proton irradiation. Nevertheless, this phenomenon is not identified for carbon ion beams since their straggling is lower. It would need a greater spatial resolution to be observed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Audouin
- Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, LIDYL, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| | | | - Y Ngono-Ravache
- CIMAP, CEA-CNRS-ENSICAEN-UNICAEN, Normandy University, Cedex 04, 14050, Caen, France
| | - L Desorgher
- Institute of Radiation Physics (IRA), Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CH-1007, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - G Baldacchino
- Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, LIDYL, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ruan H, Okamoto M, Ohno T, Li Y, Zhou Y. Particle radiotherapy for breast cancer. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1107703. [PMID: 37655110 PMCID: PMC10467264 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1107703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor in female patients. Along with surgery, radiotherapy is one of the most commonly prescribed treatments for breast cancer. Over the past few decades, breast cancer radiotherapy technology has significantly improved. Nevertheless, related posttherapy complications should not be overlooked. Common complications include dose-related coronary toxicity, radiation pneumonia, and the risk of second primary cancer of the contralateral breast. Particle radiotherapy with protons or carbon ions is widely attracting interest as a potential competitor to conventional photon radiotherapy because of its superior physical and biological characteristics. This article summarizes the results of clinical research on proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy for treating breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanguang Ruan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Masahiko Okamoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Ohno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| | - Yang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China
| | - Yuan Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Japan
- Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lo CY, Tsai SW, Niu H, Chen FH, Hwang HC, Chao TC, Hsiao IT, Liaw JW. Gold-Nanoparticles-Enhanced Production of Reactive Oxygen Species in Cells at Spread-Out Bragg Peak under Proton Beam Radiation. ACS OMEGA 2023; 8:17922-17931. [PMID: 37251180 PMCID: PMC10210040 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.3c01025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/31/2023]
Abstract
This study investigates the radiobiological effects of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) as radiosensitizers for proton beam therapy (PBT). Specifically, we explore the enhanced production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in GNP-loaded tumor cells irradiated by a 230 MeV proton beam in a spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) zone obtained by a passive scattering system. Our findings indicate that the radiosensitization enhancement factor is 1.24 at 30% cell survival fraction, 8 days after 6 Gy proton beam irradiation. Since protons deposit the majority of their energy at the SOBP region and interact with GNPs to induce more ejected electrons from the high-Z GNPs, these ejected electrons then react with water molecules to produce excessive ROS that can damage cellular organelles. Laser scanning confocal microscopy reveals the excessive ROS induced inside the GNP-loaded cells immediately after proton irradiation. Furthermore, the damage to cytoskeletons and mitochondrial dysfunction in GNP-loaded cells caused by the induced ROS becomes significantly severe, 48 h after proton irradiation. Our biological evidence suggests that the cytotoxicity of GNP-enhanced ROS production has the potential to increase the tumoricidal efficacy of PBT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang-Yun Lo
- Department
of Mechanical Engineering, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Shiao-Wen Tsai
- Department
of Biomedical Engineering, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Department
of Periodontics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei 105, Taiwan
| | - Huan Niu
- Accelerator
Laboratory, Nuclear Science and Technology Development Center, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 300, Taiwan
| | - Fang-Hsin Chen
- Institute
of Nuclear Engineering and Science, National
Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 300, Taiwan
- Department
of Radiation Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial
Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Department
of Medical Imaging and Radiological Science, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Hsiao-Chien Hwang
- Proton
and Radiation Therapy Center, Linkou Chang
Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Tsi-Chian Chao
- Department
of Medical Imaging and Radiological Science, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Ing-Tsung Hsiao
- Department
of Medical Imaging and Radiological Science, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Jiunn-Woei Liaw
- Department
of Mechanical Engineering, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Proton
and Radiation Therapy Center, Linkou Chang
Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
- Department
of Mechanical Engineering, Ming Chi University
of Technology, New Taipei City 243, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Variable Relative Biological Effectiveness of Proton Therapy Increases PET-Visible Mucosal Injury in Head and Neck Cancer Patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:861-865. [PMID: 36368433 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.10.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2022] [Revised: 10/17/2022] [Accepted: 10/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
13
|
Singh A, Kitpanit S, Neal B, Yorke E, White C, Yom SK, Randazzo JD, Wong RJ, Huryn JM, Tsai CJ, Zakeri K, Lee NY, Estilo CL. Osteoradionecrosis of the Jaw Following Proton Radiation Therapy for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2023; 149:151-159. [PMID: 36547968 PMCID: PMC9912132 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2022.4165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2022] [Accepted: 10/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Importance Proton radiation therapy (PRT) has reduced radiation-induced toxic effects, such as mucositis and xerostomia, over conventional photon radiation therapy, leading to significantly improved quality of life in patients with head and neck cancers. However, the prevalence of osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaw following PRT in these patients is less clear. Objective To report the prevalence and clinical characteristics of ORN in patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer (OOPC) treated with PRT. Design, Setting, and Participants This case series reports a single-institution experience (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York) between November 2013 and September 2019 and included 122 radiation therapy-naive patients with OOPC treated with PRT. Data were analyzed from 2013 to 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures Clinical parameters, including sex, age, comorbidities, tumor histology, concurrent chemotherapy, smoking, comorbidities, and preradiation dental evaluation, were obtained from the medical record. Patients with clinical or radiographic signs of ORN were identified and graded using the adopted modified Glanzmann and Grätz grading system. Characteristics of ORN, such as location, clinical presentation, initial stage at diagnosis, etiology, time to diagnosis, management, and clinical outcome at the last follow-up, were also collected. Results Of the 122 patients (mean [SD] age, 63 [13] years; 45 [36.9%] women and 77 [63.1%] men) included in this study, 13 (10.6%) developed ORN following PRT during a median (range) follow-up time of 40.6 (<1-101) months. All patients had spontaneous development of ORN. At the time of initial diagnosis, grade 0, grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3 ORN were seen in 2, 1, 9, and 1 patient, respectively. The posterior ipsilateral mandible within the radiation field that received the full planned PRT dose was the most involved ORN site. At a median (range) follow-up of 13.5 (0.2-58.0) months from the time of ORN diagnosis, complete resolution, stable condition, and progression of ORN were seen in 3, 6, and 4 patients, respectively. The 3-year rates of ORN and death in the total cohort were 5.2% and 21.5%, while the 5-year rates of ORN and death were 11.5% and 34.4%, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this case series, the prevalence of ORN following PRT was found to be 10.6%, indicating that ORN remains a clinical challenge even in the era of highly conformal PRT. Clinicians treating patients with OOPC with PRT should be mindful of this complication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annu Singh
- Dental Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sarin Kitpanit
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Pathumwan, Bangkok
| | - Brian Neal
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Charlie White
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - SaeHee K. Yom
- Dental Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Joseph D. Randazzo
- Dental Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Richard J. Wong
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Joseph M. Huryn
- Dental Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
- Dental Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Chiaojung Jillian Tsai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Kaveh Zakeri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Cherry L. Estilo
- Dental Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Eichkorn T, Lischalk JW, Hörner-Rieber J, Deng M, Meixner E, Krämer A, Hoegen P, Sandrini E, Regnery S, Held T, Harrabi S, Jungk C, Herfarth K, Debus J, König L. Analysis of safety and efficacy of proton radiotherapy for IDH-mutated glioma WHO grade 2 and 3. J Neurooncol 2023; 162:489-501. [PMID: 36598613 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-022-04217-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2022] [Accepted: 12/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Proton beam radiotherapy (PRT) has been demonstrated to improve neurocognitive sequelae particularly. Nevertheless, following PRT, increased rates of radiation-induced contrast enhancements (RICE) are feared. How safe and effective is PRT for IDH-mutated glioma WHO grade 2 and 3? METHODS We analyzed 194 patients diagnosed with IDH-mutated WHO grade 2 (n = 128) and WHO grade 3 (n = 66) glioma who were treated with PRT from 2010 to 2020. Serial clinical and imaging follow-up was performed for a median of 5.1 years. RESULTS For WHO grade 2, 61% were astrocytoma and 39% oligodendroglioma while for WHO grade 3, 55% were astrocytoma and 45% oligodendroglioma. Median dose for IDH-mutated glioma was 54 Gy(RBE) [range 50.4-60 Gy(RBE)] for WHO grade 2 and 60 Gy(RBE) [range 54-60 Gy(RBE)] for WHO grade 3. Five year overall survival was 85% in patients with WHO grade 2 and 67% in patients with WHO grade 3 tumors. Overall RICE risk was 25%, being higher in patients with WHO grade 2 (29%) versus in patients with WHO grade 3 (17%, p = 0.13). RICE risk increased independent of tumor characteristics with older age (p = 0.017). Overall RICE was symptomatic in 31% of patients with corresponding CTCAE grades as follows: 80% grade 1, 7% grade 2, 13% grade 3, and 0% grade 3 + . Overall need for RICE-directed therapy was 35%. CONCLUSION These data demonstrate the effectiveness of PRT for IDH-mutated glioma WHO grade 2 and 3. The RICE risk differs with WHO grading and is higher in older patients with IDH-mutated Glioma WHO grade 2 and 3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York, University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, NY, USA
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Maximilian Deng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Anna Krämer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Philipp Hoegen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Elisabetta Sandrini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Jungk
- Department of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Bradley JA, Liang X, Mailhot Vega RB, Liu C, Brooks ED, Burchianti T, Viviers E, Dagan R, Oladeru OT, Morris CG, Mendenhall NP. Incidence of Rib Fracture following Treatment with Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer. Int J Part Ther 2023; 9:269-278. [PMID: 37169006 PMCID: PMC10166011 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-22-00034.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 01/30/2023] [Indexed: 05/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To determine the rib fracture rate in a cohort of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy. Patient and Methods From a prospective database, we identified 225 patients treated with proton therapy between 2012 and 2020 (223 women; 2 men). Clinical and dosimetric data were extracted, the cumulative incidence method assessed rib fracture rate, and Fine-Gray tests assessed prognostic significance of select variables. In-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture that occurred in a rib located within the 10% isodose line. Out-of-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture occurring in a rib location outside of the 10% isodose line. Results Of the patients, 74% had left-sided breast cancer; 5%, bilateral; and 21%, right-sided. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans showed normality in 20%, osteopenia in 34%, and osteoporosis in 6% (test not performed in 40%). Additionally, 57% received an aromatase inhibitor. Target volumes were breast ± internal mammary nodes (IMNs) (16%), breast and comprehensive regional lymphatics (32%), chest wall ± IMNs (1%), and chest wall/comprehensive regional lymphatics (51%). Passive-scattered proton therapy was used for 41% of patients, 58% underwent pencil-beam scanning (PBS), and 1% underwent a combination (passive scattering/PBS), with 85% of patients receiving a boost. Median follow-up was 3.1 years, with 97% having >12-month follow-up. The 3-year cumulative in-field rib fracture incidence was 3.7%. Eight patients developed in-field rib fractures (1 symptomatic, 7 imaging identified) for a 0.4% symptomatic rib fracture rate. Median time from radiation completion to rib fracture identification was 1.8 years (fractures were identified within 2.2 years for 7 of 8 patients). No variables were associated with rib fracture on univariate analysis. Three fractures developed outside the radiation field (0.9% cumulative incidence of out-of-field rib fracture). Conclusion In this series of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy, the 3-year rib fracture rates remain low (in-field 3.7%; symptomatic 0.4%). As in photon therapy, the asymptomatic rate may be underestimated owing to a lack of routine surveillance imaging. However, patients experiencing symptomatic rib fractures after proton therapy for breast cancer are rare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julie A. Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | | | - Raymond B. Mailhot Vega
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Chunbo Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Eric D. Brooks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Teena Burchianti
- University of Florida Health Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Emma Viviers
- University of Florida Health Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Roi Dagan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Oluwadamilola T. Oladeru
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Christopher G. Morris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Nancy P. Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville and Jacksonville, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Eichkorn T, Lischalk JW, Sandrini E, Meixner E, Regnery S, Held T, Bauer J, Bahn E, Harrabi S, Hörner-Rieber J, Herfarth K, Debus J, König L. Iatrogenic Influence on Prognosis of Radiation-Induced Contrast Enhancements in Patients with Glioma WHO 1-3 following Photon and Proton Radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:133-143. [PMID: 36041565 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.025] [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: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 07/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Radiation-induced contrast enhancement (RICE) is a common side effect following radiotherapy for glioma, but both diagnosis and handling are challenging. Due to the potential risks associated with RICE and its challenges in differentiating RICE from tumor progression, it is critical to better understand how RICE prognosis depends on iatrogenic influence. MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified 99 patients diagnosed with RICE who were previously treated with either photon or proton therapy for World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1-3 primary gliomas. Post-treatment brain MRI-based volumetric analysis and clinical data collection was performed at multiple time points. RESULTS The most common histologic subtypes were astrocytoma (50%) and oligodendroglioma (46%). In 67%, it was graded WHO grade 2 and in 86% an IDH mutation was present. RICE first occurred after 16 months (range: 1 - 160) in median. At initial RICE occurrence, 39% were misinterpreted as tumor progression. A tumor-specific therapy including chemotherapy or re-irradiation led to a RICE size progression in 86% and 92% of cases, respectively and RICE symptom progression in 57% and 65% of cases, respectively. A RICE-specific therapy such as corticosteroids or Bevacizumab for larger or symptomatic RICE led to a RICE size regression in 81% of cases with symptom stability or regression in 62% of cases. CONCLUSIONS While with chemotherapy and re-irradiation a RICE progression was frequently observed, anti-edematous or anti-VEGF treatment frequently went along with a RICE regression. For RICE, correct diagnosis and treatment decisions are challenging and critical and should be made interdisciplinarily.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Elisabetta Sandrini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Thomas Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Julia Bauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Emanuel Bahn
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Frame CM, Chen Y, Gagnon J, Yuan Y, Ma T, Dritschilo A, Pang D. Proton induced DNA double strand breaks at the Bragg peak: Evidence of enhanced LET effect. Front Oncol 2022; 12:930393. [PMID: 35992825 PMCID: PMC9388940 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.930393] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
PurposeTo investigate DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) induced by therapeutic proton beams in plateau and Bragg peak to demonstrate DSB induction due to the higher LET in the Bragg peak.Materials and MethodspUC19 plasmid DNA samples were irradiated to doses of 1000 and 3000 Gy on a Mevion S250i proton system with a monoenergetic, 110 MeV, proton beam at depths of 2 and 9.4 cm, corresponding to a position on the plateau and distal Bragg peak of the beam, respectively. The irradiated DNA samples were imaged by atomic force microscopy for visualization of individual DNA molecules, either broken or intact, and quantification of the DNA fragment length distributions for each of the irradiated samples. Percentage of the broken DNA and average number of DSBs per DNA molecule were obtained.ResultsCompared to irradiation effects in the plateau region, DNA irradiated at the Bragg peak sustained more breakage at the same dose, yielding more short DNA fragments and higher numbers of DSB per DNA molecule.ConclusionThe higher LET of proton beams at the Bragg peak results in more densely distributed DNA DSBs, which supports an underlying mechanism for the increased cell killing by protons at the Bragg peak.
Collapse
|
18
|
Fang K, Lee C, Chuang H, Huang T, Chien C, Tsai W, Fang F. Acute radiation dermatitis among patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with proton beam therapy: Prognostic factors and treatment outcomes. Int Wound J 2022; 20:499-507. [PMID: 35880316 PMCID: PMC9885453 DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13897] [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: 06/03/2022] [Revised: 07/02/2022] [Accepted: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
A high incidence of severe acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) has been reported for cancer patients treated by proton beam therapy (PBT). This observational study investigated the prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of ARD among patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated with PBT. Fifty-seven patients with newly diagnosed NPC and treated with PBT were enrolled. ARD was recorded weekly based on the criteria of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 at treatment visits (1st to 7th weeks) and 1 week (8th week) and 1 month (11th week) after the completion of PBT. The maximum ARD grade was 1, 2, and 3 in 26 (45.6%), 24 (42.1%), and 7 (12.3%) of the patients, respectively. The peak incidence of grade 2 and 3 ARD was observed during the period of the 6th to 8th weeks. Treatment of ARD included topical corticosteroid alone in 24 (42.1%) patients, topical corticosteroid plus silver sulfadiazine in 33 (57.9%) patients, and non-adhering silicone dressing to cover severe skin wound area in 25 (43.8%) patients. In the 11th week, most grade 2 and 3 ARD had disappeared and 93.0% of the patients had ARD of grade 1 or lower. In the binary logistic regression model, we identified habitual smoking (odds ratio [OR]: 5.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-18.8, P = .012) and N2 to N3 nodal status (OR: 4.9, 95% CI: 1.6-15.4, P = .006) as independent predictors of grade 2 and 3 ARD. The results show ARD is a major concern for patients with NPC treated with PBT, especially those with habitual smoking or advanced nodal status. Topical corticosteroid, silver sulfadiazine, and non-adhering silicone dressing are effective for treating ARD induced by PBT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ko‐Chun Fang
- Department of EducationKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Chih‐Hung Lee
- Department of DermatologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Hui‐Ching Chuang
- Department of OtolaryngologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan,Department of MedicineChang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
| | - Tai‐Lin Huang
- Department of Hematology and OncologyKaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Chih‐Yen Chien
- Department of OtolaryngologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan,Department of MedicineChang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
| | - Wen‐Ling Tsai
- Department of Cosmetics and Fashion StylingCenter for Environmental Toxin and Emerging‐Contaminant Research, Cheng Shiu UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Fu‐Min Fang
- Department of MedicineChang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan,Department of Radiation OncologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Radiation-induced contrast enhancement following proton radiotherapy for low-grade glioma depends on tumor characteristics and is rarer in children than adults. Radiother Oncol 2022; 172:54-64. [PMID: 35568281 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.005] [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: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 04/21/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Proton beam radiotherapy (PRT) is used in the treatment of low-grade glioma (LGG) to mitigate long-term sequelae. Following PRT, increased rates of radiation-induced contrast enhancements (RICE) are suspected but poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS We analyzed consecutive 227 patients (42 children and 185 adults) treated with PRT (54Gy RBE) for LGG from 2010 to 2020 and followed with serial clinical exams and magnetic resonance imaging for in median 5.6 years. RESULTS Tumors were graded WHO 1 in a minority (n = 22, 12%) of adults, but a majority of children (n = 29, 69%). In contrast, tumors were graded WHO 2 in the majority (n = 160, 87%) of adults and a minority of children (n = 10, 24%). Five-year overall survival following PRT was 81% in adults and 91% in children. The risk of RICE was 5-fold more frequent in adults (25%) versus children (5%) (p = 0.0043). In children and adults, RICE were symptomatic in 50% and 55% (n=1 and 26) of cases with CTCAE grade 0 in 47% (n=23), grade 1 in 25% (n=12), 0% grade 2 (n=0) and 29% grade 3 (n=14), respectively. In adults, RICE risk was associated to WHO grading (8% in WHO grade 1 vs. 24% in WHO grade 2, p = 0.026), independent of age (p=0.44) and irradiation dose (p=0.005), but not independent of IDH mutational status. CONCLUSIONS These data demonstrate effectiveness of PRT for LGG in both children and adults. The RICE risk is lower in children which are a main target group for PRT and differs with WHO grading.
Collapse
|
20
|
Liu C, Bradley JA, Zheng D, Vega RBM, Beltran CJ, Mendenhall N, Liang X. RBE-weighted dose and its impact on the risk of acute coronary event for breast cancer patients treated with intensity modulated proton therapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2022; 23:e13527. [PMID: 35060317 PMCID: PMC8992952 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2021] [Revised: 12/11/2021] [Accepted: 12/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose to the heart and to estimate RBE uncertainties when assuming a constant RBE of 1.1, for breast cancer patients receiving intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Further, to study the impact of RBE uncertainties on the risk of an acute coronary event (ACE). MATERIAL AND METHODS We analyzed 20 patients who received IMPT to either the left breast (n = 10) or left chest wall (n = 10) and regional lymph nodes. The Monte Carlo simulation engine, MCsquare, was used to simulate the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) map. The RBE-weighted dose to the heart and its substructures was calculated using three different RBE models. The risk of ACE was estimated per its linear relationship with mean heart dose (MHD) as established by Darby et al. RESULTS The median MHD increased from 1.33 GyRBE assuming an RBE of 1.1 to 1.64, 1.87, and 1.99 GyRBE when using the RBE-weighted dose models. The median values (and ranges) of the excess absolute risk of ACE were 0.4% (0.1%-0.8%) when assuming an RBE of 1.1, and 0.6% (0.2%-1.0%), 0.6% (0.2%-1.1%), and 0.7% (0.2%-1.1%) with the RBE-weighted models. For our patient cohort, the maximum excess absolute risk of ACE increased by 0.3% with the RBE-weighted doses compared to the constant RBE of 1.1, reaching an excess absolute ACE risk of 1.1%. The interpatient LETd variation was small for the relevant high-dose regions of the heart. CONCLUSION All three RBE models predicted a higher biological dose compared to the clinical standard dose assuming a constant RBE of 1.1. An underestimation of the biological dose results in underestimation of the ACE risk. Analyzing the voxel-by-voxel biological dose and the LET map alongside clinical outcomes is warranted in the development of a more accurate normal-tissue complication probability model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chunbo Liu
- University of Florida Health Proton Therapy InstituteJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Julie A. Bradley
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of Florida College of MedicineJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Dandan Zheng
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of Nebraska Medical CenterOmahaNebraskaUSA
| | - Raymond B. Mailhot Vega
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of Florida College of MedicineJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Chris J. Beltran
- Mayo ClinicDepartment of Radiation OncologyJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Nancy Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of Florida College of MedicineJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Mayo ClinicDepartment of Radiation OncologyJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Cellular plasticity upon proton irradiation determines tumor cell radiosensitivity. Cell Rep 2022; 38:110422. [PMID: 35196495 DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2022.110422] [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: 06/23/2021] [Revised: 11/24/2021] [Accepted: 02/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton radiotherapy has been implemented into the standard-of-care for cancer patients within recent years. However, experimental studies investigating cellular and molecular mechanisms are lacking, and prognostic biomarkers are needed. Cancer stem cell (CSC)-related biomarkers, such as aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH), are known to influence cellular radiosensitivity through inactivation of reactive oxygen species, DNA damage repair, and cell death. In a previous study, we found that ionizing radiation itself enriches for ALDH-positive CSCs. In this study, we analyze CSC marker dynamics in prostate cancer, head and neck cancer, and glioblastoma cells upon proton beam irradiation. We find that proton irradiation has a higher potential to target CSCs through induction of complex DNA damages, lower rates of cellular senescence, and minor alteration in histone methylation pattern compared with conventional photon irradiation. Mathematical modeling indicates differences in plasticity rates among ALDH-positive CSCs and ALDH-negative cancer cells between the two irradiation types.
Collapse
|
22
|
Buglewicz DJ, Walsh KD, Hirakawa H, Kitamura H, Fujimori A, Kato TA. Biological Effects of Monoenergetic Carbon Ions and Their Associated Secondary Particles. Front Oncol 2022; 12:788293. [PMID: 35251969 PMCID: PMC8892238 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.788293] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2021] [Accepted: 01/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are the main factor behind carbon-ion radiation therapy (CIRT)-induced cell death. Nuclear interactions along the beam path between the primary carbon ions and targets result in nuclear fragmentation of carbon ions and recoiled particles. These secondary particles travel further distances past the Bragg peak to the tail region, leading to unwanted biological effects that may result in cytotoxicity in critical organs and secondary induced tumors following CIRT. Here, we confirmed that the density of the DSB distributions increases as the cell survival decreases at the Bragg peak and demonstrated that by visualizing DSBs, the various LET fragmentation ions and recoiled particles produced differences in their biological effects in the post-Bragg peak tail regions. This suggests that the density of the DSBs within the high-LET track structures, rather than only their presence, is important for inducing cell death. These results are essential for CIRT treatment planning to limit the amount of healthy cell damage and reducing both the late effect and the secondary tumor-associated risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dylan J. Buglewicz
- Department of Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States
| | - Kade D. Walsh
- Department of Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States
| | - Hirokazu Hirakawa
- Department of Charged Particle Therapy Research, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | - Hisashi Kitamura
- National Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | - Akira Fujimori
- Department of Charged Particle Therapy Research, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | - Takamitsu A. Kato
- Department of Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States
- *Correspondence: Takamitsu A. Kato,
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Hedrick SG, Walker B, Morris B, Petro S, Blakey M. Scripted spot removal in PBS proton therapy planning. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 23:e13491. [PMID: 34890101 PMCID: PMC8833280 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13491] [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: 08/20/2021] [Revised: 10/19/2021] [Accepted: 11/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background It is well known in proton therapy that the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) is not constant across the entire Bragg peak, with higher RBE at the distal end of the Bragg peak due to higher linear energy transfer (LET). Treatment planning systems are moving toward LET optimization to mitigate this potentially higher biological impact at a track end. However, using a simple script, proton users can begin to simulate this process by deleting spots from critical structures during optimization. In most cases, nominal target coverage and plan robustness remain satisfactory. Methods In our clinic, we developed a script that allows the user to delete spots in all organs at risk (OARs) of interest for one or more treatment beams. The purpose of this script is to potentially reduce side effects by eliminating Bragg peaks within OARs. The script was first used for prostate patients where spots in the rectum and sigmoid, outside of the overlap with the target, were deleted. We then began to use the script for head and neck (H&N) and breast/chestwall patients to reduce acute side effects of the skin by removing spots in a 0.5‐cm skin rind. Conclusions By utilizing a simple script for deleting spots in critical structures, we have seen excellent clinical results thus far. We have noted reduced skin reactions for nearly all H&N and breast patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Bryant Walker
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Bart Morris
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Scott Petro
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Marc Blakey
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Therapeutic Efficacy of Variable Biological Effectiveness of Proton Therapy in U-CH2 and MUG-Chor1 Human Chordoma Cell Death. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13236115. [PMID: 34885223 PMCID: PMC8656796 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13236115] [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: 07/16/2021] [Revised: 11/22/2021] [Accepted: 11/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Chordoma is a rare, slow-growing cancer of the spinal cord. Photon radiation therapy and surgery are the standard of care for chordoma. Proton radiation therapy has become an increasingly common treatment in comparison to photon radiation therapy due to the ability to reduce off-target radiation dose. However, there is still an increased risk of toxicity to the surrounding critical structures that lead to poor treatment outcomes. Moreover, the biologic effectiveness of protons to sterilize chordoma cells remains uncertain and likely varies according to the proton energy spectrum throughout the proton field. We aim to investigate the tumoricidal properties of proton radiation therapy at the middle and end of the proton radiation field and elucidate variations in the relative biological effectiveness for chordoma cells. Our study helps quantify the therapeutic value of treating chordoma near the end of the proton field, where linear energy transfer is relatively high. Abstract Background: Chordoma is a cancer of spinal cord, skull base, and sacral area. Currently, the standard of care to treat chordoma is resection followed by radiation therapy. Since, chordoma is present in the spinal cord and these are very sensitive structures and often complete removal by surgery is not possible. As a result, chordoma has a high chance of recurrence and developing resistance to radiation therapy. In addition, treatment of chordoma by conventional radiation therapy can also damage normal tissues surrounding chordoma. Thus, current therapeutic options to treat chordoma are insufficient and novel therapies are desperately needed to treat locally advanced and metastatic chordoma. (2) Methods: In the present investigation, human chordoma cell lines of sacral origin MUG-Chor1 and U-CH2 were cultured and irradiated with Proton Beam Radiation using the clinical superconducting cyclotron and pencil-beam (active) scanning at Middle and End of the Spread-Out Bragg Peak (SOBP). Proton radiation was given at the following doses: Mug-Chor1 at 0, 1, 2, 4, and 8 Gy and U-CH2 at 0, 4, 8, 12, and 16 Gy. These doses were selected based on a pilot study in our lab and attempted to produce approximate survival fractions in the range of 1, 0.9, 0.5, 0.1, and 0.01, respectively, chosen for linear quadratic model fitting of the dose response. (3) Results: In this study, we investigated relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of proton radiation at the end of Spread Out Bragg Peak assuming that the reference radiation is a proton radiation in the middle of the SOBP. We observed differences in the survival of both Human chordoma cell lines, U-CH2 and MUG-Chor1. The data showed that there was a significantly higher cell death at the end of the Bragg peak as compared to middle of the Bragg peak. Based on the linear quadratic (LQ) fit for cell survival we calculated the RBE between M-SOBP and E-SOBP at 95% CI level and it was observed that RBE was higher than 1 at E-SOBP and caused significantly higher cell killing. Proton field at E-SOBP caused complex DNA damage in comparison to M-EOBP and the genes such as DNA topoisomerase 1, GTSE1, RAD51B were downregulated in E-SOBP treated cells. Thus, we conclude that there seems to be substantial variation in RBE (1.3–1.7) at the E-SOBP compared with the M-SOBP.
Collapse
|
25
|
Mohamed N, Lee A, Lee NY. Proton beam radiation therapy treatment for head and neck cancer. PRECISION RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/pro6.1135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nader Mohamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston TX USA
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Sørensen BS, Pawelke J, Bauer J, Burnet NG, Dasu A, Høyer M, Karger CP, Krause M, Schwarz M, Underwood TSA, Wagenaar D, Whitfield GA, Lühr A. Does the uncertainty in relative biological effectiveness affect patient treatment in proton therapy? Radiother Oncol 2021; 163:177-184. [PMID: 34480959 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2021] [Revised: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/22/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Clinical treatment with protons uses the concept of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) to convert the absorbed dose into an RBE-weighted dose that equals the dose for radiotherapy with photons causing the same biological effect. Currently, in proton therapy a constant RBE of 1.1 is generically used. However, empirical data indicate that the RBE is not constant, but increases at the distal edge of the proton beam. This increase in RBE is of concern, as the clinical impact is still unresolved, and clinical studies demonstrating a clinical effect of an increased RBE are emerging. Within the European Particle Therapy Network (EPTN) work package 6 on radiobiology and RBE, a workshop was held in February 2020 in Manchester with one day of discussion dedicated to the impact of proton RBE in a clinical context. Current data on RBE effects, patient outcome and modelling from experimental as well as clinical studies were presented and discussed. Furthermore, representatives from European clinical proton therapy centres, who were involved in patient treatment, laid out their current clinical practice on how to consider the risk of a variable RBE in their centres. In line with the workshop, this work considers the actual impact of RBE issues on patient care in proton therapy by reviewing preclinical data on the relation between linear energy transfer (LET) and RBE, current clinical data sets on RBE effects in patients, and applied clinical strategies to manage RBE uncertainties. A better understanding of the variability in RBE would allow development of proton treatments which are safer and more effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brita S Sørensen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Experimental Clinical Oncology - Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
| | - Jörg Pawelke
- 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 (HZDR), Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Julia Bauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Alexandru Dasu
- The Skandion Clinic, Uppsala, Sweden; Medical Radiation Sciences, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Morten Høyer
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Christian P Karger
- Dept. of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- 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 (HZDR), Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium Dresden and German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg, Germany; Dept. of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine C.G. Carus, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden, German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine C.G. Carus Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Marco Schwarz
- Protontherapy Department -Trento Hospital, and TIFPA-INFN, Trento, Italy
| | - Tracy S A Underwood
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, UK
| | - Dirk Wagenaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Gillian A Whitfield
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; University of Manchester, UK
| | - Armin Lühr
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Suckert T, Nexhipi S, Dietrich A, Koch R, Kunz-Schughart LA, Bahn E, Beyreuther E. Models for Translational Proton Radiobiology-From Bench to Bedside and Back. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:4216. [PMID: 34439370 PMCID: PMC8395028 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13164216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Revised: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
The number of proton therapy centers worldwide are increasing steadily, with more than two million cancer patients treated so far. Despite this development, pending questions on proton radiobiology still call for basic and translational preclinical research. Open issues are the on-going discussion on an energy-dependent varying proton RBE (relative biological effectiveness), a better characterization of normal tissue side effects and combination treatments with drugs originally developed for photon therapy. At the same time, novel possibilities arise, such as radioimmunotherapy, and new proton therapy schemata, such as FLASH irradiation and proton mini-beams. The study of those aspects demands for radiobiological models at different stages along the translational chain, allowing the investigation of mechanisms from the molecular level to whole organisms. Focusing on the challenges and specifics of proton research, this review summarizes the different available models, ranging from in vitro systems to animal studies of increasing complexity as well as complementing in silico approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theresa Suckert
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01309 Dresden, Germany; (T.S.); (S.N.); (A.D.); (L.A.K.-S.)
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sindi Nexhipi
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01309 Dresden, Germany; (T.S.); (S.N.); (A.D.); (L.A.K.-S.)
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, 01309 Dresden, Germany
| | - Antje Dietrich
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01309 Dresden, Germany; (T.S.); (S.N.); (A.D.); (L.A.K.-S.)
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Robin Koch
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (R.K.); (E.B.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Leoni A. Kunz-Schughart
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01309 Dresden, Germany; (T.S.); (S.N.); (A.D.); (L.A.K.-S.)
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany
| | - Emanuel Bahn
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (R.K.); (E.B.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, 69120 Heidelberg, 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, 01309 Dresden, Germany; (T.S.); (S.N.); (A.D.); (L.A.K.-S.)
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden—Rossendorf, Institute of Radiation Physics, 01328 Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
A simple microscopy setup for visualizing cellular responses to DNA damage at particle accelerator facilities. Sci Rep 2021; 11:14528. [PMID: 34267233 PMCID: PMC8282881 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-92950-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Accepted: 05/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Cellular responses to DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) not only promote genomic integrity in healthy tissues, but also largely determine the efficacy of many DNA-damaging cancer treatments, including X-ray and particle therapies. A growing body of evidence suggests that activation of the mechanisms that detect, signal and repair DSBs may depend on the complexity of the initiating DNA lesions. Studies focusing on this, as well as on many other radiobiological questions, require reliable methods to induce DSBs of varying complexity, and to visualize the ensuing cellular responses. Accelerated particles of different energies and masses are exceptionally well suited for this task, due to the nature of their physical interactions with the intracellular environment, but visualizing cellular responses to particle-induced damage - especially in their early stages - at particle accelerator facilities, remains challenging. Here we describe a straightforward approach for real-time imaging of early response to particle-induced DNA damage. We rely on a transportable setup with an inverted fluorescence confocal microscope, tilted at a small angle relative to the particle beam, such that cells can be irradiated and imaged without any microscope or beamline modifications. Using this setup, we image and analyze the accumulation of fluorescently-tagged MDC1, RNF168 and 53BP1-key factors involved in DSB signalling-at DNA lesions induced by 254 MeV α-particles. Our results provide a demonstration of technical feasibility and reveal asynchronous initiation of accumulation of these proteins at different individual DSBs.
Collapse
|
29
|
Zhou Q, Howard ME, Tu X, Zhu Q, Denbeigh JM, Remmes NB, Herman MG, Beltran CJ, Yuan J, Greipp PT, Boughey JC, Wang L, Johnson N, Goetz MP, Sarkaria JN, Lou Z, Mutter RW. Inhibition of ATM Induces Hypersensitivity to Proton Irradiation by Upregulating Toxic End Joining. Cancer Res 2021; 81:3333-3346. [PMID: 33597272 PMCID: PMC8260463 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-20-2960] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2020] [Revised: 12/30/2020] [Accepted: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Proton Bragg peak irradiation has a higher ionizing density than conventional photon irradiation or the entrance of the proton beam profile. Whether targeting the DNA damage response (DDR) could enhance vulnerability to the distinct pattern of damage induced by proton Bragg peak irradiation is currently unknown. Here, we performed genetic or pharmacologic manipulation of key DDR elements and evaluated DNA damage signaling, DNA repair, and tumor control in cell lines and xenografts treated with the same physical dose across a radiotherapy linear energy transfer spectrum. Radiotherapy consisted of 6 MV photons and the entrance beam or Bragg peak of a 76.8 MeV spot scanning proton beam. More complex DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) induced by Bragg peak proton irradiation preferentially underwent resection and engaged homologous recombination (HR) machinery. Unexpectedly, the ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) inhibitor, AZD0156, but not an inhibitor of ATM and Rad3-related, rendered cells hypersensitive to more densely ionizing proton Bragg peak irradiation. ATM inhibition blocked resection and shunted more DSBs to processing by toxic ligation through nonhomologous end-joining, whereas loss of DNA ligation via XRCC4 or Lig4 knockdown rescued resection and abolished the enhanced Bragg peak cell killing. Proton Bragg peak monotherapy selectively sensitized cell lines and tumor xenografts with inherent HR defects, and the repair defect induced by ATM inhibitor coadministration showed enhanced efficacy in HR-proficient models. In summary, inherent defects in HR or administration of an ATM inhibitor in HR-proficient tumors selectively enhances the relative biological effectiveness of proton Bragg peak irradiation. SIGNIFICANCE: Coadministration of an ATM inhibitor rewires DNA repair machinery to render cancer cells uniquely hypersensitive to DNA damage induced by the proton Bragg peak, which is characterized by higher density ionization.See related commentary by Nickoloff, p. 3156.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qin Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Xinyi Tu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Qian Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Janet M Denbeigh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Michael G Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jian Yuan
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
- Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Patricia T Greipp
- Division of Laboratory Genetics and Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Judy C Boughey
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Liewei Wang
- Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Neil Johnson
- Molecular Therapeutics Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Matthew P Goetz
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jann N Sarkaria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Zhenkun Lou
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
- Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Horendeck D, Walsh KD, Hirakawa H, Fujimori A, Kitamura H, Kato TA. High LET-Like Radiation Tracks at the Distal Side of Accelerated Proton Bragg Peak. Front Oncol 2021; 11:690042. [PMID: 34178687 PMCID: PMC8222778 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.690042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2021] [Accepted: 05/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy is a type of hadron radiotherapy used for treating solid tumors. Unlike heavy charged elements, proton radiation is considered to be low LET (Linear Energy Transfer) radiation, like X-rays. However, the clinical SOBP (Spread Out Bragg Peak) proton radiation is considered to be higher in relative biological effectiveness (RBE) than both X-ray and their own entrance region. The RBE is estimated to be 1.1–1.2, which can be attributed to the higher LET at the SOBP region than at the entrance region. In order to clarify the nature of higher LET near the Bragg peak of proton radiation and its potential cytotoxic effects, we utilized a horizontal irradiation system with CHO cells. Additionally, we examined DNA repair mutants, analyzed cytotoxicity with colony formation, and assessed DNA damage and its repair with γ-H2AX foci assay in a high-resolution microscopic scale analysis along with the Bragg peak. Besides confirming that the most cytotoxic effects occurred at the Bragg peak, extended cytotoxicity was observed a few millimeters after the Bragg peak. γ-H2AX foci numbers reached a maximum at the Bragg peak and reduced dramatically after the Bragg peak. However, in the post-Bragg peak region, particle track-like structures were sporadically observed. This region contains foci that are more difficult to repair. The peak and post-Bragg peak regions contain rare high LET-like radiation tracks and can cause cellular lethality. This may have caused unwanted side effects and complexities of outputs for the proton therapy treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dakota Horendeck
- Department of Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States
| | - Kade D Walsh
- Department of Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States
| | - Hirokazu Hirakawa
- National Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | - Akira Fujimori
- National Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | - Hisashi Kitamura
- Radiation Emergency Medical Assistance Team, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | - Takamitsu A Kato
- Department of Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Clinical Progress in Proton Radiotherapy: Biological Unknowns. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13040604. [PMID: 33546432 PMCID: PMC7913745 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040604] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Revised: 01/27/2021] [Accepted: 02/01/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Proton radiation therapy is a more recent type of radiotherapy that uses proton beams instead of classical photon or X-rays beams. The clinical benefit of proton therapy is that it allows to treat tumors more precisely. As a result, proton radiotherapy induces less toxicity to healthy tissue near the tumor site. Despite the experience in the clinical use of protons, the response of cells to proton radiation, the radiobiology, is less understood. In this review, we describe the current knowledge about proton radiobiology. Abstract Clinical use of proton radiation has massively increased over the past years. The main reason for this is the beneficial depth-dose distribution of protons that allows to reduce toxicity to normal tissues surrounding the tumor. Despite the experience in the clinical use of protons, the radiobiology after proton irradiation compared to photon irradiation remains to be completely elucidated. Proton radiation may lead to differential damages and activation of biological processes. Here, we will review the current knowledge of proton radiobiology in terms of induction of reactive oxygen species, hypoxia, DNA damage response, as well as cell death after proton irradiation and radioresistance.
Collapse
|
32
|
Behrends C, Haussmann J, Kramer PH, Langendijk JA, Gottschlag H, Geismar D, Budach W, Timmermann B. Model-based comparison of organ at risk protection between VMAT and robustly optimised IMPT plans. Z Med Phys 2021; 31:5-15. [PMID: 33358063 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2020.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2020] [Revised: 09/07/2020] [Accepted: 09/18/2020] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
The comparison between intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, based on models of normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP), can support the choice of radiation modality. IMPT irradiation plans for 50 patients with head and neck tumours originally treated with photon therapy have been robustly optimised against density and setup uncertainties. The dose distribution has been calculated with a Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm. The comparison of the plans was based on dose-volume parameters in organs at risk (OARs) and NTCP-calculations for xerostomia, sticky saliva, dysphagia and tube feeding using Langendijk's model-based approach. While the dose distribution in the target volumes is similar, the IMPT plans show better protection of OARs. Therefore, it is not the high dose confirmation that constitutes the advantage of protons, but it is the reduction of the mid-to-low dose levels compared to photons. This work investigates to what extent the advantages of proton radiation are beneficial for the patient's post-therapeutic quality of life (QoL). As a result, approximately one third of the patients examined benefit significantly from proton therapy with regard to possible late side effects. Clinical data is needed to confirm the model-based calculations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carina Behrends
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), Essen, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany; West German Cancer Centre (WTZ), Essen, Germany.
| | - Jan Haussmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - P-H Kramer
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Centre (WTZ), Essen, Germany
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Holger Gottschlag
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Dirk Geismar
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), Essen, Germany; Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Centre (WTZ), Essen, Germany; Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Germany
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Liu C, Zheng D, Bradley JA, Mailhot Vega RB, Zhang Y, Indelicato DJ, Mendenhall N, Liang X. Incorporation of the LETd-weighted biological dose in the evaluation of breast intensity-modulated proton therapy plans. Acta Oncol 2021; 60:252-259. [PMID: 33063569 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2020.1834141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the LETd-weighted biological dose to OARs in proton therapy for breast cancer and to study the relationship of the LETd-weighted biological dose relative to the standard dose (RBE = 1.1) and thereby to provide estimations of the biological dose uncertainties with the standard dose calculations (RBE = 1.1) commonly used in clinical practice. METHOD This study included 20 patients who received IMPT treatment to the whole breast/chest wall and regional lymph nodes. The LETd distributions were calculated along with the physical dose using an open-source Monte Carlo simulation package, MCsquare. Using the McMahon linear model, the LETd-weighted biological dose was computed from the physical dose and LETd. OAR doses were compared between the Dose (RBE = 1.1) and the LETd-weighted biological dose, on brachial plexus, rib, heart, esophagus, and Ipsilateral lung. RESULTS On average, the LETd-weighted biological dose compared to the Dose (RBE = 1.1) was higher by 8% for the brachial plexus D0.1 cc, 13% for the ribs D0.5 cc, 24% for mean heart dose, and 10% for the esophagus D0.1 cc, respectively. The LETd-weighted doses to the Ipsilateral lung V5, V10, and V20 were comparable to the Dose (RBE = 1.1). No statistically significant difference in biological dose enhancement to OARs was observed between the intact breast group and the CW group, with the exception of the ribs: the CW group experienced slightly greater biological dose enhancement (13% vs. 12%, p = 0.04) to the ribs than the intact breast group. CONCLUSION Enhanced biological dose was observed compared to standard dose with assumed RBE of 1.1 for the heart, ribs, esophagus, and brachial plexus in breast/CW and regional nodal IMPT plans. Variable RBE models should be considered in the evaluation of the IMPT breast plans, especially for OARs located near the end of range of a proton beam. Clinical outcome studies are needed to validate model predictions for clinical toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chunbo Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
- School of Physical Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
| | - Dandan Zheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Julie A. Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Raymond B. Mailhot Vega
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Yawei Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Daniel J. Indelicato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Nancy Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Proton Radiotherapy to Preserve Fertility and Endocrine Function: A Translational Investigation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 109:84-94. [PMID: 32758642 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.07.2320] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2019] [Revised: 07/20/2020] [Accepted: 07/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Photon radiation therapy (x-ray radiation therapy [XRT] and gamma-ray radiation therapy [GRT]) of tumors close to ovaries causes reproductive and endocrine sequelae due to ovarian primordial follicle depletion. Given its finite range, proton radiation therapy (PRT) can preserve ovarian function when ovaries are positioned distal to the spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) in tumors of the abdominopelvic region. This study compared anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels (a biomarker of ovarian function) and primordial follicle survival after in vivo mouse pelvic GRT versus PRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS One hundred twenty-four female prepubertal mice received sham, GRT, or PRT with ovaries positioned at various depth with respect to the proton SOBP, with single doses of 1.8 or 0.2 Gy. AMH was measured at baseline, 1, 3, and 8 weeks after treatment, and the total number of surviving primordial follicles was counted. Multivariable linear mixed-effects modeling was used to assess the relationship between radiation therapy modality and dose on AMH and primordial follicle survival. RESULTS For ovaries beyond the SOBP, ovarian function (P = .5) and ovarian primordial follicle (OPF; P = 1.0) were spared relative to sham controls. For ovaries in the SOBP plateau, ovarian function and primordial follicle reserve 8 weeks after treatment were reduced for all groups: 1.8 Gy GRT (βAMH = -4.9 ng/mL; βOPF = -728.2/animal), 1.8 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE] = 1.1) PRT (βAMH = -5.1 ng/mL; βOPF = -728.2/animal), 0.2 Gy GRT (βAMH = -2.5 ng/mL; βOPF = -595.1/animal), and 0.2 Gy (RBE = 1.1) PRT (βAMH = -3.0 ng/mL; βOPF = -555.4/animal) relative to sham controls (all differences P < .001). CONCLUSIONS This study uses an animal model to demonstrate the safety of proton therapy in sparing fertility. Ovaries positioned beyond the SOBP during PRT maintain ovarian reserve, suggesting that a proton beam has no energy and exit dose beyond SOBP. This study proposes that proton therapy is much safer than photon radiation therapy to protect ovarian follicles with the same dose, and it supports further testing of proton therapy for abdominopelvic tumors in young women.
Collapse
|
35
|
Howard ME, Denbeigh JM, Debrot EK, Remmes NB, Herman MG, Beltran CJ. A High-Precision Method for In Vitro Proton Irradiation. Int J Part Ther 2020; 7:62-69. [PMID: 33274258 PMCID: PMC7707323 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00007.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2020] [Accepted: 07/02/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Although proton therapy has become a well-established radiation modality, continued efforts are needed to improve our understanding of the molecular and cellular mechanisms occurring during treatment. Such studies are challenging, requiring many resources. The purpose of this study was to create a phantom that would allow multiple in vitro experiments to be irradiated simultaneously with a spot-scanning proton beam. Materials and Methods The setup included a modified patient-couch top coupled with a high-precision robotic arm for positioning. An acrylic phantom was created to hold 4 6-well cell-culture plates at 2 different positions along the Bragg curve in a reproducible manner. The proton treatment plan consisted of 1 large field encompassing all 4 plates with a monoenergetic 76.8-MeV posterior beam. For robust delivery, a mini pyramid filter was used to broaden the Bragg peak (BP) in the depth direction. Both a Markus ionization chamber and EBT3 radiochromic film measurements were used to verify absolute dose. Results A treatment plan for the simultaneous irradiation of 2 plates irradiated with high linear energy transfer protons (BP, 7 keV/μm) and 2 plates irradiated with low linear energy transfer protons (entrance, 2.2 keV/μm) was created. Dose uncertainty was larger across the setup for cell plates positioned at the BP because of beam divergence and, subsequently, variable proton-path lengths. Markus chamber measurements resulted in uncertainty values of ±1.8% from the mean dose. Negligible differences were seen in the entrance region (<0.3%). Conclusion The proposed proton irradiation setup allows 4 plates to be simultaneously irradiated with 2 different portions (entrance and BP) of a 76.8-MeV beam. Dosimetric uncertainties across the setup are within ±1.8% of the mean dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Janet M Denbeigh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | | | - Michael G Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Li X, Lee A, Cohen MA, Sherman EJ, Lee NY. Past, present and future of proton therapy for head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol 2020; 110:104879. [PMID: 32650256 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2020.104879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Proton therapy has recently gained substantial momentum worldwide due to improved accessibility to the technology and sustained interests in its advantage of better tissue sparing compared to traditional photon radiation. Proton therapy in head and neck cancer has a unique advantage given the complex anatomy and proximity of targets to vital organs. As head and neck cancer patients are living longer due to epidemiological shifts and advances in treatment options, long-term toxicity from radiation treatment has become a major concern that may be better mitigated by proton therapy. With increased utilization of proton therapy, new proton centers breaking ground, and as excitement about the technology continue to increase, we aim to comprehensively review the evidence of proton therapy in major subsites within the head and neck, hoping to facilitate a greater understanding of the full risks and benefits of proton therapy for head and neck cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xingzhe Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Marc A Cohen
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Eric J Sherman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Moreno AC, Gunther JR, Milgrom S, Fuller CD, Williamson T, Liu A, Wu R, Zhu XR, Dabaja BS, Pinnix CC. Effect of Deep Inspiration Breath Hold on Normal Tissue Sparing With Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Proton Therapy for Mediastinal Lymphoma. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 5:1255-1266. [PMID: 33305086 PMCID: PMC7718527 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Revised: 07/27/2020] [Accepted: 08/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Intensity modulated radiation therapy delivered with deep-inspiration breath hold (IMRT-BH) provides favorable normal tissue dosimetric profiles when treating patients with mediastinal lymphoma. However, it is unclear if IMRT-BH plans are comparable to free breathing (FB) proton plans. We performed a retrospective, comparative dosimetric study between IMRT-BH and FB passive scatter proton therapy (P-FB) or intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT-FB). Hypothesizing that BH would provide superior normal tissue sparing when added to proton therapy, we also compared plans to passive scatter BH (P-BH). METHODS AND MATERIALS For 15 patients who received involved-site RT with "butterfly" IMRT-BH, 3 additional proton plans (P-FB, IMPT-FB, P-BH) were optimized to deliver 30.6 Gy/Gy relative biological effectiveness. Dosimetric variables (mean dose, V30, V25, V15, and V5) for organs at risk (OARs) were calculated and compared using nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS Of 57 studied OAR parameters, IMRT-BH plans were comparable in 37 (65%) parameters with P-FB plans, 32 (56%) of IMPT-FB parameters, and 30 (53%) of P-BH parameters. Doses to breasts were generally equivalent among plans while esophageal dosing was worse with IMRT-BH. Mean doses and V5 of the total lung and heart were the highest with IMRT-BH; however, IMRT-BH resulted in comparable coronary and superior lung V30 relative to proton plans. The addition of BH with proton therapy resulted in the greatest lung sparing, with mean lung dose reductions of 11% to 38%. CONCLUSIONS The use of BH with IMRT reduces the disparity in OAR doses with equivalence achieved in nearly two-thirds of OAR metrics compared with P-FB and 50% compared with IMPT-BH. Because each modality exhibited unique benefits, personalization of modality selection is recommended. Proton therapy via BH provides additional benefits in heart and lung sparing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jillian R. Gunther
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sarah Milgrom
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado
| | - C. David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Tyler Williamson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Amy Liu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Richard Wu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - X. Ronald Zhu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Bouthaina S. Dabaja
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Chelsea C. Pinnix
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Kitpanit S, Lee A, Pitter KL, Fan D, Chow JC, Neal B, Han Z, Fox P, Sine K, Mah D, Dunn LA, Sherman EJ, Michel L, Ganly I, Wong RJ, Boyle JO, Cohen MA, Singh B, Brennan CW, Gavrilovic IT, Hatzoglou V, O'Malley B, Zakeri K, Yu Y, Chen L, Gelblum DY, Kang JJ, McBride SM, Tsai CJ, Riaz N, Lee NY. Temporal Lobe Necrosis in Head and Neck Cancer Patients after Proton Therapy to the Skull Base. Int J Part Ther 2020; 6:17-28. [PMID: 32582816 PMCID: PMC7302730 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00014.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2020] [Accepted: 04/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To demonstrate temporal lobe necrosis (TLN) rate and clinical/dose-volume factors associated with TLN in radiation-naïve patients with head and neck cancer treated with proton therapy where the field of radiation involved the skull base. MATERIALS AND METHODS Medical records and dosimetric data for radiation-naïve patients with head and neck cancer receiving proton therapy to the skull base were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with <3 months of follow-up, receiving <45 GyRBE or nonconventional fractionation, and/or no follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were excluded. TLN was determined using MRI and graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0. Clinical (gender, age, comorbidities, concurrent chemotherapy, smoking, radiation techniques) and dose-volume parameters were analyzed for TLN correlation. The receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC) were performed to determine the cutoff points of significant dose-volume parameters. RESULTS Between 2013 and 2019, 234 patients were included. The median follow-up time was 22.5 months (range = 3.2-69.3). Overall TLN rates of any grade, ≥ grade 2, and ≥ grade 3 were 5.6% (N = 13), 2.1%, and 0.9%, respectively. The estimated 2-year TLN rate was 4.6%, and the 2-year rate of any brain necrosis was 6.8%. The median time to TLN was 20.9 months from proton completion. Absolute volume receiving 40, 50, 60, and 70 GyRBE (absolute volume [aV]); mean and maximum dose received by the temporal lobe; and dose to the 0.5, 1, and 2 cm3 volume receiving the maximum dose (D0.5cm3, D1cm3, and D2cm3, respectively) of the temporal lobe were associated with greater TLN risk while clinical parameters showed no correlation. Among volume parameters, aV50 gave maximum AUC (0.921), and D2cm3 gave the highest AUC (0.935) among dose parameters. The 11-cm3 cutoff value for aV50 and 62 GyRBE for D2cm3 showed maximum specificity and sensitivity. CONCLUSION The estimated 2-year TLN rate was 4.6% with a low rate of toxicities ≥grade 3; aV50 ≤11 cm3, D2cm3 ≤62 GyRBE and other cutoff values are suggested as constraints in proton therapy planning to minimize the risk of any grade TLN. Patients whose temporal lobe(s) unavoidably receive higher doses than these thresholds should be carefully followed with MRI after proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarin Kitpanit
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ken L. Pitter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dan Fan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - James C.H. Chow
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong, China
| | - Brian Neal
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, USA
| | - Zhiqiang Han
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, USA
| | - Pamela Fox
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, USA
| | - Kevin Sine
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, USA
| | - Dennis Mah
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, USA
| | - Lara A. Dunn
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eric J. Sherman
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Loren Michel
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ian Ganly
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Richard J. Wong
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jay O. Boyle
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Marc A. Cohen
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bhuvanesh Singh
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Cameron W. Brennan
- Department of Neurosurgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Igor T. Gavrilovic
- Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vaios Hatzoglou
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bernard O'Malley
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kaveh Zakeri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong, China
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, USA
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yao Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Linda Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daphna Y. Gelblum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jung Julie Kang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sean M. McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Chiaojung J. Tsai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nadeem Riaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Fan M, Kang JJ, Lee A, Fan D, Wang H, Kitpanit S, Fox P, Sine K, Mah D, McBride SM, Tsai CJ, Riaz N, Dunn LA, Sherman EJ, Michel L, Singh B, Ganly I, Wong RJ, Boyle JO, Cohen MA, Lee NY. Outcomes and toxicities of definitive radiotherapy and reirradiation using 3-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated (pencil beam) proton therapy for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus malignancies. Cancer 2020; 126:1905-1916. [PMID: 32097507 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32776] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2019] [Revised: 01/12/2020] [Accepted: 01/21/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton therapy (PT) improves outcomes in patients with nasal cavity (NC) and paranasal sinus (PNS) cancers. Herein, the authors have reported to their knowledge the largest series to date using intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in the treatment of these patients. METHODS Between 2013 and 2018, a total of 86 consecutive patients (68 of whom were radiation-naive and 18 of whom were reirradiated) received PT to median doses of 70 grays and 67 grays relative biological effectiveness, respectively. Approximately 53% received IMPT. RESULTS The median follow-up was 23.4 months (range, 1.7-69.3 months) for all patients and 28.1 months (range, 2.3-69.3 months) for surviving patients. The 2-year local control (LC), distant control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 83%, 84%, 74%, and 81%, respectively, for radiation-naive patients and 77%, 80%, 54%, and 66%, respectively for reirradiated patients. Among radiation-naive patients, when compared with 3-dimensional conformal proton technique, IMPT significantly improved LC (91% vs 72%; P < .01) and independently predicted LC (hazard ratio, 0.14; P = .01). Sixteen radiation-naive patients (24%) experienced acute grade 3 toxicities; 4 (6%) experienced late grade 3 toxicities (osteoradionecrosis, vision loss, soft-tissue necrosis, and soft tissue fibrosis) (grading was performed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 5.0]). Slightly inferior LC was noted for patients undergoing reirradiation with higher complications: 11% experienced late grade 3 toxicities (facial pain and brain necrosis). Patients treated with reirradiation had more grade 1 to 2 radionecrosis than radiation-naive patients (brain: 33% vs 7% and osteoradionecrosis: 17% vs 3%). CONCLUSIONS PT achieved remarkable LC for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus cancers with lower grade 3 toxicities relative to historical reports. IMPT has the potential to improve the therapeutic ratio in these malignancies and is worthy of further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ming Fan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China
| | - Jung Julie Kang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Dan Fan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Huili Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sarin Kitpanit
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Pamela Fox
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - Kevin Sine
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - Dennis Mah
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - Sean M McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Chiaojung Jillian Tsai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nadeem Riaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Lara A Dunn
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Eric J Sherman
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Loren Michel
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Bhuvanesh Singh
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ian Ganly
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Richard J Wong
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Jay O Boyle
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Marc A Cohen
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Li XD, Simone CB. The inflammatory response from stereotactic body proton therapy versus stereotactic body radiation therapy: implications from early stage non-small cell lung cancer. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2020; 7:S295. [PMID: 32016014 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.11.41] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Xingzhe D Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Deycmar S, Faccin E, Kazimova T, Knobel PA, Telarovic I, Tschanz F, Waller V, Winkler R, Yong C, Zingariello D, Pruschy M. The relative biological effectiveness of proton irradiation in dependence of DNA damage repair. Br J Radiol 2019; 93:20190494. [PMID: 31687835 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Clinical parameters and empirical evidence are the primary determinants for current treatment planning in radiation oncology. Personalized medicine in radiation oncology is only at the very beginning to take the genetic background of a tumor entity into consideration to define an individual treatment regimen, the total dose or the combination with a specific anticancer agent. Likewise, stratification of patients towards proton radiotherapy is linked to its physical advantageous energy deposition at the tumor site with minimal healthy tissue being co-irradiated distal to the target volume. Hence, the fact that photon and proton irradiation also induce different qualities of DNA damages, which require differential DNA damage repair mechanisms has been completely neglected so far. These subtle differences could be efficiently exploited in a personalized treatment approach and could be integrated into personalized treatment planning. A differential requirement of the two major DNA double-strand break repair pathways, homologous recombination and non-homologous end joining, was recently identified in response to proton and photon irradiation, respectively, and subsequently influence the mode of ionizing radiation-induced cell death and susceptibility of tumor cells with defects in DNA repair machineries to either quality of ionizing radiation.This review focuses on the differential DNA-damage responses and subsequent biological processes induced by photon and proton irradiation in dependence of the genetic background and discusses their impact on the unicellular level and in the tumor microenvironment and their implications for combined treatment modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simon Deycmar
- Laboratory for Applied Radiobiology Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Ricardi U, Maraldo MV, Levis M, Parikh RR. Proton Therapy For Lymphomas: Current State Of The Art. Onco Targets Ther 2019; 12:8033-8046. [PMID: 31632057 PMCID: PMC6781741 DOI: 10.2147/ott.s220730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2019] [Accepted: 09/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
The combination of brief chemo-radiotherapy provides high cure rates and represents the first line of treatment for many lymphoma patients. As a result, a high proportion of long-term survivors may experience treatment-related toxic events many years later. Excess and unintended radiation dose to organs at risk (particularly heart, lungs and breasts) may translate in an increased risk of cardiovascular events and second cancers after a few decades. Minimizing dose to organs at risk is thus pivotal to restrain the risk of long-term complications. Proton therapy, with its peculiar physic properties, may help to better spare organs at risk and consequently to reduce toxicities especially in patients receiving mediastinal radiotherapy. Herein, we review the physical basis of proton therapy and the rationale for its implementation in lymphoma patients, with a detailed description of the clinical data. We also discuss the potential disadvantages and uncertainties of protons that may limit their application and critically review the dosimetric studies comparing the risk of late complications between proton and photon radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Maja V Maraldo
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mario Levis
- Department of Oncology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Rahul R Parikh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Mutter RW, Jethwa KR, Wan Chan Tseung HS, Wick SM, Kahila MMH, Viehman JK, Shumway DA, Corbin KS, Park SS, Remmes NB, Whitaker TJ, Beltran CJ. Incorporation of Biologic Response Variance Modeling Into the Clinic: Limiting Risk of Brachial Plexopathy and Other Late Effects of Breast Cancer Proton Beam Therapy. Pract Radiat Oncol 2019; 10:e71-e81. [PMID: 31494289 PMCID: PMC7734652 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2019.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2019] [Revised: 07/30/2019] [Accepted: 08/29/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Purpose: The relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) rises with increasing linear energy transfer toward the end of proton tracks. Presently, there is no consensus on how RBE heterogeneity should be accounted for in breast cancer proton therapy treatment planning. Our purpose was to determine the dosimetric consequences of incorporating a brachial plexus (BP) biologic dose constraint and to describe other clinical implications of biologic planning. Methods and Materials: We instituted a biologic dose constraint for the BP in the context of MC1631, a randomized trial of conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT plans of 13 patients treated before the implementation of the biologic dose constraint (cohort A) were compared with IMPT plans of 38 patients treated on MC1631 after its implementation (cohort B) using (1) a commercially available Eclipse treatment planning system (RBE = 1.1); (2) an in-house graphic processor unit-based Monte Carlo physical dose simulation (RBE = 1.1); and (3) an in-house Monte Carlo biologic dose (MCBD) simulation that assumes a linear relationship between RBE and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (product of RBE and physical dose = biologic dose). Results: Before implementation of a BP biologic dose constraint, the Eclipse mean BP D0.01 cm3 was 107%, and the MCBD estimate was 128% (ie, 64 Gy [RBE = biologic dose] in 25 fractions for a 50-Gy [RBE = 1.1] prescription), compared with 100.0% and 116.0%, respectively, after the implementation of the constraint. Implementation of the BP biologic dose constraint did not significantly affect clinical target volume coverage. MCBD plans predicted greater internal mammary node coverage and higher heart dose than Eclipse plans. Conclusions: Institution of a BP biologic dose constraint may reduce brachial plexopathy risk without compromising target coverage. MCBD plan evaluation provides valuable information to physicians that may assist in making clinical judgments regarding relative priority of target coverage versus normal tissue sparing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Mutter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - Krishan R Jethwa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Stephanie M Wick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Jason K Viehman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Dean A Shumway
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Sean S Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Gjyshi O, Liao Z. Proton therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Br J Radiol 2019; 93:20190378. [PMID: 31430188 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190378] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy is an essential component of treatment for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but can be technically challenging because of the proximity of lung tumors to nearby critical organs or structures. The most effective strategy for reducing radiation-induced toxicity is to reduce unnecessary exposure of normal tissues by using advanced technology; examples from photon (X-ray) therapy have included three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy versus its predecessor, two-dimensional radiation therapy, and intensity-modulated photon radiation therapy versus its predecessor, three-dimensional conformal therapy. Using particle-beam therapy rather than photons offers the potential for further advantages because of the unique depth-dose characteristics of the particles, which can be exploited to allow still higher dose escalation to tumors with greater sparing of normal tissues, with the ultimate goal of improving local tumor control and survival while preserving quality of life by reducing treatment-related toxicity. However, the costs associated with particle therapy with protons are considerably higher than the current state of the art in photon technology, and evidence of clinical benefit from protons is increasingly being demanded to justify the higher financial burden on the healthcare system. Some such evidence is available from preclinical studies, from retrospective, single-institution clinical series, from analyses of national databases, and from single-arm prospective studies in addition to several ongoing randomized comparative trials. This review summarizes the rationale for and challenges of using proton therapy to treat thoracic cancers, reviews the current clinical experience, and suggests topics for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olsi Gjyshi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Zhongxing Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Li Y, Dykstra M, Best TD, Pursley J, Chopra N, Keane FK, Khandekar MJ, Sharp GC, Paganetti H, Willers H, Fintelmann FJ, Grassberger C. Differential inflammatory response dynamics in normal lung following stereotactic body radiation therapy with protons versus photons. Radiother Oncol 2019; 136:169-175. [PMID: 31015121 PMCID: PMC6592748 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2018] [Revised: 03/29/2019] [Accepted: 04/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To compare time-dependent changes in lung parenchyma of early-stage non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients after stereotactic body radiation therapy with protons (SBPT) or photons (SBRT). MATERIALS AND METHOD We retrospectively identified NSCLC patients treated with SBPT and matched each one with a SBRT patient by patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics. Lung parenchyma on serial post-treatment chest computer tomography (CT) scans was deformably registered with the treatment plan to analyze lung density changes as function of dose, quantified by Houndsfield Unit (HU)/Gy. A thoracic radiologist also evaluated the CTs using an established grading system. RESULTS We matched 23 SBPT/SBRT pairs, including 5 patients treated with both modalities (internally matched cohort). Normal lung response following SBPT significantly increased in the early time period (CTs acquired <6 months, median 3 months) post-treatment, and then did not change significantly in the later time period (CTs acquired 6-14 months, median 9 months). For SBRT, the normal lung response was similar to SBPT in the early time period, but then increased significantly from the early to the late time period (p = 0.007). These differences were most pronounced in sensitive (response >6 HU/Gy) patients and in the internally matched cohort. However, there was no significant difference in the maximum observed response in the entire cohort over all time periods, median 3.4 [IQR, 1.0-5.4] HU/Gy (SBPT) versus 2.5 [1.6-5.2] HU/Gy (SBRT). Qualitative radiological evaluation was highly correlated with the quantitative analysis (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION While there was no significant difference in maximum response after SBPT versus SBRT, dose-defined lung inflammation occurred earlier after proton irradiation. Further investigation is warranted into the mechanisms of inflammation and therapeutic consequences after proton versus photon irradiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yanjing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Michael Dykstra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Till D Best
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Jennifer Pursley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Nitish Chopra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Florence K Keane
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Melin J Khandekar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Gregory C Sharp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | - Henning Willers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
| | | | - Clemens Grassberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Fujinaga H, Sakai Y, Yamashita T, Arai K, Terashima T, Komura T, Seki A, Kawaguchi K, Nasti A, Yoshida K, Wada T, Yamamoto K, Kume K, Hasegawa T, Takata T, Honda M, Kaneko S. Biological characteristics of gene expression features in pancreatic cancer cells induced by proton and X-ray irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol 2019; 95:571-579. [PMID: 30557072 DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2019.1558297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiation therapy is an important alternative treatment for advanced cancer. The aim of the current study was to disclose distinct alterations of the biological characteristics of gene expression features in pancreatic cancer cells, MIAPaCa-2, following proton and X-ray irradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using cDNA microarray, we examined the gene expression alterations of MIAPaCa-2 cells following proton or X-ray irradiation. We also isolated the surviving MIAPaCa-2 cells after irradiation and analyzed their gene expression profiles. RESULTS Although the cytocidal effects of both types of irradiation were similar at sufficient doses in vitro and in vivo, the affected gene expression profile alterations of MIAPaCa-2 cells irradiated with protons were distinct from those irradiated with X-ray. Interestingly, clustering analysis of gene expression of the surviving MIAPaCa-2 cells was also completely discernible between the two types of irradiation. However, a similar cytocidal effect was still observed in the proton- and X-ray-irradiated surviving cells after re-irradiation, commonly showing biological effects related to apoptosis and cell cycle processes. CONCLUSIONS Proton irradiation treatment for pancreatic cancer provides the distinct biological effect of steady gene expression alterations compared to X-ray irradiation; however, surviving cells from both types of irradiation were still susceptible to the cytocidal effects induced by proton re-irradiation treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Haruo Fujinaga
- a Disease control and homeostasis , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Yoshio Sakai
- b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Tatsuya Yamashita
- b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Kuniaki Arai
- b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Takeshi Terashima
- b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Takuya Komura
- c System Biology , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Akihiro Seki
- c System Biology , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Kazunori Kawaguchi
- b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Alessandro Nasti
- a Disease control and homeostasis , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Keiko Yoshida
- a Disease control and homeostasis , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Takashi Wada
- d Department of Nephrology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | | | - Kyo Kume
- e The Wakasa Wan Energy Research Center , Tsuruga , Japan
| | | | - Takushi Takata
- e The Wakasa Wan Energy Research Center , Tsuruga , Japan
| | - Masao Honda
- b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan
| | - Shuichi Kaneko
- a Disease control and homeostasis , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan.,b Department of Gastroenterology , Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa , Japan.,c System Biology , Kanazawa University , Kanazawa , Japan
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Nielsen S, Bassler N, Grzanka L, Laursen L, Swakon J, Olko P, Andreassen CN, Alsner J, Singers Sørensen B. Comparison of Coding Transcriptomes in Fibroblasts Irradiated With Low and High LET Proton Beams and Cobalt-60 Photons. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 103:1203-1211. [PMID: 30529373 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.11.065] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2018] [Revised: 10/27/2018] [Accepted: 11/29/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify differential cellular responses after proton and photon irradiation by comparing transcriptomes of primary fibroblasts irradiated with either radiation type. METHODS AND MATERIALS A panel of primary dermal fibroblast cultures was irradiated with low and higher linear energy transfer (LET) proton beams. Cobalt-60 photon irradiation was used as reference. Dose was delivered in 3 fractions of 3.5 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) using a relative biological effectiveness of 1.1 for proton doses. Cells were harvested 2 hours after the final fraction was delivered, and RNA was purified. RNA sequencing was performed using Illumina NextSeq 500 with high-output kit. The edgeR package in R was used for differential gene expression analysis. RESULTS Pairwise comparisons of the transcriptomes in the 3 treatment groups showed that there were 84 and 56 differentially expressed genes in the low LET group compared with the Cobalt-60 group and the higher LET group, respectively. The higher LET proton group and the Cobalt-60 group had the most distinct transcriptome profiles, with 725 differentially regulated genes. Differentially regulated canonical pathways and various regulatory factors involved in regulation of biological mechanisms such as inflammation, carcinogenesis, and cell cycle control were identified. CONCLUSIONS Inflammatory regulators associated with the development of normal tissue complications and malignant transformation factors seem to be differentially regulated by higher LET proton and Cobalt-60 photon irradiation. The reported transcriptome differences could therefore influence the progression of adverse effects and the risk of developing secondary cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steffen Nielsen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
| | - Niels Bassler
- Medical Radiation Physics, Department of Physics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Leszek Grzanka
- Proton Radiotherapy Group, Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| | - Louise Laursen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Jan Swakon
- Proton Radiotherapy Group, Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| | - Pawel Olko
- Proton Radiotherapy Group, Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| | | | - Jan Alsner
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Brita Singers Sørensen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Oeck S, Szymonowicz K, Wiel G, Krysztofiak A, Lambert J, Koska B, Iliakis G, Timmermann B, Jendrossek V. Relating Linear Energy Transfer to the Formation and Resolution of DNA Repair Foci After Irradiation with Equal Doses of X-ray Photons, Plateau, or Bragg-Peak Protons. Int J Mol Sci 2018; 19:ijms19123779. [PMID: 30486506 PMCID: PMC6320817 DOI: 10.3390/ijms19123779] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2018] [Revised: 11/24/2018] [Accepted: 11/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton beam therapy is increasingly applied for the treatment of human cancer, as it promises to reduce normal tissue damage. However, little is known about the relationship between linear energy transfer (LET), the type of DNA damage, and cellular repair mechanisms, particularly for cells irradiated with protons. We irradiated cultured cells delivering equal doses of X-ray photons, Bragg-peak protons, or plateau protons and used this set-up to quantitate initial DNA damage (mainly DNA double strand breaks (DSBs)), and to analyze kinetics of repair by detecting γH2A.X or 53BP1 using immunofluorescence. The results obtained validate the reliability of our set-up in delivering equal radiation doses under all conditions employed. Although the initial numbers of γH2A.X and 53BP1 foci scored were similar under the different irradiation conditions, it was notable that the maximum foci level was reached at 60 min after irradiation with Bragg-peak protons, as compared to 30 min for plateau protons and photons. Interestingly, Bragg-peak protons induced larger and irregularly shaped γH2A.X and 53BP1 foci. Additionally, the resolution of these foci was delayed. These results suggest that Bragg-peak protons induce DNA damage of increased complexity which is difficult to process by the cellular repair apparatus.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Oeck
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University of Duisburg-Essen, Medical School, Virchowstrasse 173, 45122 Essen, Germany.
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, 15 York Street, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
| | - Klaudia Szymonowicz
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University of Duisburg-Essen, Medical School, Virchowstrasse 173, 45122 Essen, Germany.
| | - Gesa Wiel
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University of Duisburg-Essen, Medical School, Virchowstrasse 173, 45122 Essen, Germany.
| | - Adam Krysztofiak
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University of Duisburg-Essen, Medical School, Virchowstrasse 173, 45122 Essen, Germany.
| | - Jamil Lambert
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, University Hospital Essen, Am Muehlenbach 1, 45147 Essen, Germany.
| | - Benjamin Koska
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, University Hospital Essen, Am Muehlenbach 1, 45147 Essen, Germany.
| | - George Iliakis
- Institute of Medical Radiation Biology; University of Duisburg-Essen; Medical School; Hufelandstr. 55, 45122 Essen, Germany.
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, University Hospital Essen, Am Muehlenbach 1, 45147 Essen, Germany.
| | - Verena Jendrossek
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University of Duisburg-Essen, Medical School, Virchowstrasse 173, 45122 Essen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Dabaja BS, Hoppe BS, Plastaras JP, Newhauser W, Rosolova K, Flampouri S, Mohan R, Mikhaeel NG, Kirova Y, Specht L, Yahalom J. Proton therapy for adults with mediastinal lymphomas: the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group guidelines. Blood 2018; 132:1635-1646. [PMID: 30108066 PMCID: PMC6212652 DOI: 10.1182/blood-2018-03-837633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 77] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2018] [Accepted: 07/19/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Among adult lymphoma survivors, radiation treatment techniques that increase the excess radiation dose to organs at risk (OARs) put patients at risk for increased side effects, especially late toxicities. Minimizing radiation to OARs in adults patients with Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas involving the mediastinum is the deciding factor for the choice of treatment modality. Proton therapy may help to reduce the radiation dose to the OARs and reduce toxicities, especially the risks for cardiac morbidity and second cancers. Because proton therapy may have some disadvantages, identifying the patients and the circumstances that may benefit the most from proton therapy is important. We present modern guidelines to identify adult lymphoma patients who may derive the greatest benefit from proton therapy, along with an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of proton treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bouthaina Shbib Dabaja
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Bradford S Hoppe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL
| | - John P Plastaras
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Wayne Newhauser
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA
| | - Katerina Rosolova
- Proton Therapy Department, Proton Therapy Center Czech, Prague, Czech Republic
- Department of Oncology, Charles University in Prague and Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Stella Flampouri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - N George Mikhaeel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Youlia Kirova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Lena Specht
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and
| | - Joachim Yahalom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Monte Carlo GEANT4-based application for in vivo RBE study using small animals at LNS-INFN preclinical hadrontherapy facility. Phys Med 2018; 54:173-178. [PMID: 30037452 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2018] [Revised: 07/09/2018] [Accepted: 07/11/2018] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Preclinical studies represent an important step towards a deep understanding of the biological response to ionizing radiations. The effectiveness of proton therapy is higher than photons and, for clinical purposes, a fixed value of 1.1 is used for the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons considered 1.1. Recent in vitro studies have reported that the RBE along the spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) is not constant and, in particular, the RBE value increases on the distal part of SOBP. The present work has been carried-out in the perspective of a preclinical hadrontherapy facility at LNS-INFN and was focused on the experimental preparation of an in vivo study concerning the RBE variation along the SOBP. The main purpose of this work was to determine, using GEANT4-based Monte Carlo simulations, the best configuration for small animal treatments. The developed GEANT4 application simulates the proton-therapy beam line of LNS-INFN (CATANA facility) and allows to import the DICOM-CT images as targets. The RBE will be evaluated using a deterministic radiation damage like myelopathy as end-point. In fact, the dose at which the 50% of animals will show the myelopathy is supposed to be LET-dependent. In this work, we studied different treatment configurations in order to choose the best two that maximize the LET difference reducing as much as possible the dose released to healthy tissue. The results will be useful to plan hadrontherapy treatments for preclinical in vivo studies and, in particular, for the future in vivo RBE studies.
Collapse
|