1
|
Beyer C, Paul KM, Dorsch S, Echner G, Dinkel F, Welzel T, Seidensaal K, Hörner-Rieber J, Jäkel O, Debus J, Klüter S. Compliance of volunteers in a fully-enclosed patient rotation system for MR-guided radiation therapy: a prospective study. Radiat Oncol 2024; 19:71. [PMID: 38849900 PMCID: PMC11162055 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-024-02461-2] [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: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/09/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Particle therapy makes a noteworthy contribution in the treatment of tumor diseases. In order to be able to irradiate from different angles, usually expensive, complex and large gantries are used. Instead rotating the beam via a gantry, the patient itself might be rotated. Here we present tolerance and compliance of volunteers for a fully-enclosed patient rotation system in a clinical magnetic resonance (MR)-scanner for potential use in MR-guided radiotherapy, conducted within a prospective evaluation study. METHODS A patient rotation system was used to simulate and perform magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-examinations with 50 volunteers without an oncological question. For 20 participants, the MR-examination within the bore was simulated by introducing realistic MRI noise, whereas 30 participants received an examination with image acquisition. Initially, body parameters and claustrophobia were assessed. The subjects were then rotated to different angles for simulation (0°, 45°, 90°, 180°) and imaging (0°, 70°, 90°, 110°). At each angle, anxiety and motion sickness were assessed using a 6-item State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory (STAI-6) and a modified Motion Sickness Assessment Questionnaire (MSAQ). In addition, general areas of discomfort were evaluated. RESULTS Out of 50 subjects, three (6%) subjects terminated the study prematurely. One subject dropped out during simulation due to nausea while rotating to 45°. During imaging, further two subjects dropped out due to shoulder pain from positioning at 90° and 110°, respectively. The average result for claustrophobia (0 = no claustrophobia to 4 = extreme claustrophobia) was none to light claustrophobia (average score: simulation 0.64 ± 0.33, imaging 0.51 ± 0.39). The mean anxiety scores (0% = no anxiety to 100% = maximal anxiety) were 11.04% (simulation) and 15.82% (imaging). Mean motion sickness scores (0% = no motion sickness to 100% = maximal motion sickness) of 3.5% (simulation) and 6.76% (imaging) were obtained across all participants. CONCLUSION Our study proves the feasibility of horizontal rotation in a fully-enclosed rotation system within an MR-scanner. Anxiety scores were low and motion sickness was only a minor influence. Both anxiety and motion sickness showed no angular dependency. Further optimizations with regard to immobilization in the rotation device may increase subject comfort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cedric Beyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Katharina Maria Paul
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Dorsch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Gernot Echner
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Fabian Dinkel
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Welzel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Katharina Seidensaal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), 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) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Klüter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Thwaites DI, Prokopovich DA, Garrett RF, Haworth A, Rosenfeld A, Ahern V. The rationale for a carbon ion radiation therapy facility in Australia. J Med Radiat Sci 2024; 71 Suppl 2:59-76. [PMID: 38061984 PMCID: PMC11011608 DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.744] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Accepted: 11/17/2023] [Indexed: 04/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Australia has taken a collaborative nationally networked approach to achieve particle therapy capability. This supports the under-construction proton therapy facility in Adelaide, other potential proton centres and an under-evaluation proposal for a hybrid carbon ion and proton centre in western Sydney. A wide-ranging overview is presented of the rationale for carbon ion radiation therapy, applying observations to the case for an Australian facility and to the clinical and research potential from such a national centre.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David I. Thwaites
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of PhysicsUniversity of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Department of Radiation OncologySydney West Radiation Oncology NetworkWestmeadNew South WalesAustralia
- Radiotherapy Research Group, Institute of Medical ResearchSt James's Hospital and University of LeedsLeedsUK
| | | | - Richard F. Garrett
- Australian Nuclear Science and Technology OrganisationLucas HeightsNew South WalesAustralia
| | - Annette Haworth
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of PhysicsUniversity of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Department of Radiation OncologySydney West Radiation Oncology NetworkWestmeadNew South WalesAustralia
| | - Anatoly Rosenfeld
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, School of PhysicsUniversity of WollongongSydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - Verity Ahern
- Department of Radiation OncologySydney West Radiation Oncology NetworkWestmeadNew South WalesAustralia
- Westmead Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and HealthUniversity of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Qubala A, Shafee J, Tessonnier T, Horn J, Winter M, Naumann J, Jäkel O. Characteristics of breathing-adapted gating using surface guidance for use in particle therapy: A phantom-based end-to-end test from CT simulation to dose delivery. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2024; 25:e14249. [PMID: 38128056 PMCID: PMC10795430 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14249] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2023] [Revised: 12/07/2023] [Accepted: 12/12/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
To account for intra-fractional tumor motion during dose delivery in radiotherapy, various treatment strategies are clinically implemented such as breathing-adapted gating and irradiating the tumor during specific breathing phases. In this work, we present a comprehensive phantom-based end-to-end test of breathing-adapted gating utilizing surface guidance for use in particle therapy. A commercial dynamic thorax phantom was used to reproduce regular and irregular breathing patterns recorded by the GateRT respiratory monitoring system. The amplitudes and periods of recorded breathing patterns were analysed and compared to planned patterns (ground-truth). In addition, the mean absolute deviations (MAD) and Pearson correlation coefficients (PCC) between the measurements and ground-truth were assessed. Measurements of gated and non-gated irradiations were also analysed with respect to dosimetry and geometry, and compared to treatment planning system (TPS). Further, the latency time of beam on/off was evaluated. Compared to the ground-truth, measurements performed with GateRT showed amplitude differences between 0.03 ± 0.02 mm and 0.26 ± 0.03 mm for regular and irregular breathing patterns, whilst periods of both breathing patterns ranged with a standard deviation between 10 and 190 ms. Furthermore, the GateRT software precisely acquired breathing patterns with a maximum MAD of 0.30 ± 0.23 mm. The PCC constantly ranged between 0.998 and 1.000. Comparisons between TPS and measured dose profiles indicated absolute mean dose deviations within institutional tolerances of ±5%. Geometrical beam characteristics also varied within our institutional tolerances of 1.5 mm. The overall time delays were <60 ms and thus within both recommended tolerances published by ESTRO and AAPM of 200 and 100 ms, respectively. In this study, a non-invasive optical surface-guided workflow including image acquisition, treatment planning, patient positioning and gated irradiation at an ion-beam gantry was investigated, and shown to be clinically viable. Based on phantom measurements, our results show a clinically-appropriate spatial, temporal, and dosimetric accuracy when using surface guidance in the clinical setting, and the results comply with international and institutional guidelines and tolerances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdallah Qubala
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- Faculty of MedicineUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO)Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Jehad Shafee
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- Saarland University of Applied SciencesSaarbrueckenGermany
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO)Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Julian Horn
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO)Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Marcus Winter
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO)Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Jakob Naumann
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO)Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO)HeidelbergGermany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT)HeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO)Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO)HeidelbergGermany
- Department of Medical Physics in Radiation OncologyGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)HeidelbergGermany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT)HeidelbergGermany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Endo M. Creation, evolution, and future challenges of ion beam therapy from a medical physicist's viewpoint (Part 3): Chapter 3. Clinical research, Chapter 4. Future challenges, Chapter 5. Discussion, and Conclusion. Radiol Phys Technol 2023; 16:443-470. [PMID: 37882992 DOI: 10.1007/s12194-023-00748-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2023] [Revised: 10/03/2023] [Accepted: 10/04/2023] [Indexed: 10/27/2023]
Abstract
Clinical studies of ion beam therapy have been performed at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL), National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS), Gesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung (GSI), and Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), in addition to the development of equipment, biophysical models, and treatment planning systems. Although cancers, including brain tumors and pancreatic cancer, have been treated with the Bevalac's neon-ion beam at the LBL (where the first clinical research was conducted), insufficient results were obtained owing to the limited availability of neon-ion beams and immaturity of related technologies. However, the 184-Inch Cyclotron's helium-ion beam yielded promising results for chordomas and chondrosarcomas at the base of the skull. Using carbon-ion beams, NIRS has conducted clinical trials for the treatment of common cancers for which radiotherapy is indicated. Because better results than X-ray therapy results have been obtained for lung, liver, pancreas, and prostate cancers, as well as pelvic recurrences of rectal cancer, the Japanese government recently approved the use of public medical insurance for carbon-ion radiotherapy, except for lung cancer. GSI obtained better results than LBL for bone and soft tissue tumors, owing to dose enhancement enabled by scanning irradiation. In addition, DKFZ compared treatment results of proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy for these tumors. This article summarizes a series of articles (Parts 1-3) and describes future issues of immune ion beam therapy and linear energy transfer optimization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masahiro Endo
- Association for Nuclear Technology in Medicine, Nikkei Bldg., 7-16 Nihombashi-Kodemmacho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 103-0001, Japan.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ahern V, Adeberg S, Fossati P, Garrett R, Hoppe B, Mahajan A, Orlandi E, Orecchia R, Prokopovich D, Seuntjens J, Thwaites D, Trifiletti D, Tsang R, Tsuji H. An international approach to estimating the indications and number of eligible patients for carbon ion radiation therapy (CIRT) in Australia. Radiother Oncol 2023; 187:109816. [PMID: 37480996 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109816] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2023] [Revised: 07/13/2023] [Accepted: 07/15/2023] [Indexed: 07/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To establish the treatment indications and potential patient numbers for carbon ion radiation therapy (CIRT) at the proposed national carbon ion (and proton) therapy facility in the Westmead precinct, New South Wales (NSW), Australia. METHODS An expert panel was convened, including representatives of four operational and two proposed international carbon ion facilities, as well as NSW-based CIRT stakeholders. They met virtually to consider CIRT available evidence and experience. Information regarding Japanese CIRT was provided pre- and post- the virtual meeting. Published information for South Korea was included in discussions. RESULTS There was jurisdictional variation in the tumours treated by CIRT due to differing incidences of some tumours, referral patterns, differences in decisions regarding which tumours to prioritise, CIRT resources available and funding arrangements. The greatest level of consensus was reached that CIRT in Australia can be justified currently for patients with adenoid cystic carcinomas and mucosal melanomas of the head and neck, hepatocellular cancer and liver metastases, base of skull meningiomas, chordomas and chondrosarcomas. Almost 1400 Australian patients annually meet the consensus-derived indications now. CONCLUSION A conservative estimate is that 1% of cancer patients in Australia (or 2% of patients recommended for radiation therapy) may preferentially benefit from CIRT for initial therapy of radiation resistant tumours, or to boost persistently active disease after other therapies, or for re-irradiation of recurrent disease. On this basis, one national carbon ion facility with up to four treatment rooms is justified for Australian patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Verity Ahern
- Sydney West Radiation Oncology Network, Westmead, Australia; Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Australia.
| | - Sebastian Adeberg
- Marburg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (MIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Marburg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, Marburg University Hospital, Marburg, Germany
| | - Piero Fossati
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Austria; Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Austria
| | - Richard Garrett
- Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, Australia
| | | | | | - Ester Orlandi
- National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (Fondazione CNAO), Pavia, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Jan Seuntjens
- Department of Medical Physics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada; Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - David Thwaites
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia; Radiotherapy Research Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Richard Tsang
- Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology and Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
| | - Hiroshi Tsuji
- National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Qubala A, Schwahofer A, Jersemann S, Eskandarian S, Harrabi S, Naumann P, Winter M, Ellerbrock M, Shafee J, Abtehi S, Herfarth K, Debus J, Jäkel O. Optimizing the Patient Positioning Workflow of Patients with Pelvis, Limb, and Chest/Spine Tumors at an Ion-Beam Gantry based on Optical Surface Guidance. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 8:101105. [PMID: 36624871 PMCID: PMC9822948 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.101105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2022] [Accepted: 10/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) has been investigated intensively to ensure correct patient positioning during a radiation therapy course. Although the implementation is well defined for photon-beam facilities, only a few analyses have been published for ion-beam therapy centers. To investigate the accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of SGRT used in ion-beam treatments against the conventional skin marks, a retrospective study of a unique SGRT installation in an ion gantry treatment room was conducted, where the environment is quite different to conventional radiation therapy. Methods and Materials There were 32 patients, divided into 3 cohorts-pelvis, limb, and chest/spine tumors-and treated with ion-beams. Two patient positioning workflows based on 300 fractions were compared: workflow with skin marks and workflow with SGRT. Position verification was followed by planar kilo voltage imaging. After image matching, 6 degrees of freedom corrections were recorded to assess interfraction positioning errors. In addition, the time required for patient positioning, image matching, and the number of repeated kilo voltage imaging also were gathered. Results SGRT decreased the translational magnitude shifts significantly (P < .05) by 0.5 ± 1.4 mm for pelvis and 1.9 ± 0.5 mm for limb, whereas for chest/spine, it increased by 0.7 ± 0.3 mm. Rotational corrections were predominantly lowered with SGRT for all cohorts with significant differences in pitch for pelvis (P = .002) and chest/spine (P = .009). The patient positioning time decreased by 18%, 9%, and 15% for pelvis, limb, and chest/spine, respectively, compared with skin marks. By using SGRT, 53% of all studied patients had faster positioning time, and 87.5% had faster matching time. Repositioning and consequent reimaging decreased from about 7% to 2% with a statistically significant difference of .042. Conclusions The quality of patient positioning before ion-beam treatments has been optimized by using SGRT without additional imaging dose. SGRT clearly reduced inefficiencies in the patient positioning workflow.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdallah Qubala
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,Faculty of Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Corresponding author: Abdallah Qubala, MSc
| | - Andrea Schwahofer
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Jersemann
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Saleh Eskandarian
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Patrick Naumann
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Marcus Winter
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Malte Ellerbrock
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jehad Shafee
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,Saarland University of Applied Sciences, Saarbruecken, Germany
| | - Samira Abtehi
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany,Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Parisi A, Beltran CJ, Furutani KM. The Mayo Clinic Florida Microdosimetric Kinetic Model of Clonogenic Survival: Application to Various Repair-Competent Rodent and Human Cell Lines. Int J Mol Sci 2022; 23:12491. [PMID: 36293348 PMCID: PMC9604502 DOI: 10.3390/ijms232012491] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Revised: 10/04/2022] [Accepted: 10/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) calculations used during the planning of ion therapy treatments are generally based on the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) and the local effect model (LEM). The Mayo Clinic Florida MKM (MCF MKM) was recently developed to overcome the limitations of previous MKMs in reproducing the biological data and to eliminate the need for ion-exposed in vitro data as input for the model calculations. Since we are considering to implement the MCF MKM in clinic, this article presents (a) an extensive benchmark of the MCF MKM predictions against corresponding in vitro clonogenic survival data for 4 rodent and 10 cell lines exposed to ions from 1H to 238U, and (b) a systematic comparison with published results of the latest version of the LEM (LEM IV). Additionally, we introduce a novel approach to derive an approximate value of the MCF MKM model parameters by knowing only the animal species and the mean number of chromosomes. The overall good agreement between MCF MKM predictions and in vitro data suggests the MCF MKM can be reliably used for the RBE calculations. In most cases, a reasonable agreement was found between the MCF MKM and the LEM IV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessio Parisi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Foote RL, Tsujii H, Imai R, Tsuji H, Hug EB, Kanai T, Lu JJ, Debus J, Engenhart-Cabillic R, Mahajan A. The Majority of United States Citizens With Cancer do not Have Access to Carbon Ion Radiotherapy. Front Oncol 2022; 12:954747. [PMID: 35875126 PMCID: PMC9304691 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.954747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2022] [Accepted: 06/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
As of December 31, 2020, there were 12 facilities located in Asia and Europe which were treating cancer patients with carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT). Between June 1994 and December 2020, 37,548 patients were treated with CIRT worldwide. Fifteen of these patients were United States (U.S.) citizens. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer statistics database, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN has conservatively estimated that there are approximately 44,340 people diagnosed each year in the U.S. with malignancies that would benefit from treatment with CIRT. The absence of CIRT facilities in the U.S. not only limits access to CIRT for cancer care but also prevents inclusion of U.S. citizens in phase III clinical trials that will determine the comparative effectiveness and cost effectiveness of CIRT for a variety of malignancies for FDA approval and insurance coverage. Past and present phase III clinical trials have not been able to enroll U.S. citizens due to their unwillingness or inability to travel abroad for CIRT for an extended period. These barriers could be overcome with a limited number of CIRT facilities in the U.S.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert L. Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Rochester, MN, United States
- *Correspondence: Robert L. Foote,
| | | | - Reiko Imai
- Department of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors, QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan
| | - Hiroshi Tsuji
- International Particle Therapy Research Center Director, QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan
| | - Eugen B. Hug
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Tatsuaki Kanai
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Radiation Therapy, Osaka Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Osaka, Japan
| | - Jiade J. Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China
| | - Juergen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Radiation Therapy, Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Anita Mahajan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Rochester, MN, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pompos A, Foote RL, Koong AC, Le QT, Mohan R, Paganetti H, Choy H. National Effort to Re-Establish Heavy Ion Cancer Therapy in the United States. Front Oncol 2022; 12:880712. [PMID: 35774126 PMCID: PMC9238353 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.880712] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
In this review, we attempt to make a case for the establishment of a limited number of heavy ion cancer research and treatment facilities in the United States. Based on the basic physics and biology research, conducted largely in Japan and Germany, and early phase clinical trials involving a relatively small number of patients, we believe that heavy ions have a considerably greater potential to enhance the therapeutic ratio for many cancer types compared to conventional X-ray and proton radiotherapy. Moreover, with ongoing technological developments and with research in physical, biological, immunological, and clinical aspects, it is quite plausible that cost effectiveness of radiotherapy with heavier ions can be substantially improved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnold Pompos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas (UT) Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States
| | - Robert L. Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
- *Correspondence: Robert L. Foote,
| | - Albert C. Koong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Quynh Thu Le
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Hak Choy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas (UT) Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Utilizing Carbon Ions to Treat Medulloblastomas that Exhibit Chromothripsis. CURRENT STEM CELL REPORTS 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s40778-022-00213-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose of Review
Novel radiation therapies with accelerated charged particles such as protons and carbon ions have shown encouraging results in oncology. We present recent applications as well as benefits and risks associated with their use.
Recent Findings
We discuss the use of carbon ion radiotherapy to treat a specific type of aggressive pediatric brain tumors, namely medulloblastomas with chromothripsis. Potential reasons for the resistance to conventional treatment, such as the presence of cancer stem cells with unique properties, are highlighted. Finally, advantages of particle radiation alone and in combination with other therapies to overcome resistance are featured.
Summary
Provided that future preclinical studies confirm the evidence of high effectiveness, favorable toxicity profiles, and no increased risk of secondary malignancy, carbon ion therapy may offer a promising tool in pediatric (neuro)oncology and beyond.
Collapse
|