1
|
Parisi A, Beltran CJ, Furutani KM. Variable RBE in proton radiotherapy: a comparative study with the predictive Mayo Clinic Florida microdosimetric kinetic model and phenomenological models of cell survival. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:185020. [PMID: 38133518 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/acf43b] [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] [Accepted: 08/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
Objectives. (1) To examine to what extent the cell- and exposure- specific information neglected in the phenomenological proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE) models could influence the computed RBE in proton therapy. (2) To explore similarities and differences in the formalism and the results between the linear energy transfer (LET)-based phenomenological proton RBE models and the microdosimetry-based Mayo Clinic Florida microdosimetric kinetic model (MCF MKM). (3) To investigate how the relationship between the RBE and the dose-mean proton LET is affected by the proton energy spectrum and the secondary fragments.Approach. We systematically compared six selected phenomenological proton RBE models with the MCF MKM in track-segment simulations, monoenergetic proton beams in a water phantom, and two spread-out Bragg peaks. A representative comparison within vitrodata for human glioblastoma cells (U87 cell line) is also included.Main results. Marked differences were observed between the results of the phenomenological proton RBE models, as reported in previous studies. The dispersion of these models' results was found to be comparable to the spread in the MCF MKM results obtained by varying the cell-specific parameters neglected in the phenomenological models. Furthermore, while single cell-specific correlation between RBE and the dose-mean proton LET seems reasonable above 2 keVμm-1, caution is necessary at lower LET values due to the relevant contribution of secondary fragments. The comparison within vitrodata demonstrates comparable agreement between the MCF MKM predictions and the results of the phenomenological models.Significance. The study highlights the importance of considering cell-specific characteristics and detailed radiation quality information for accurate RBE calculations in proton therapy. Furthermore, these results provide confidence in the use of the MCF MKM for clonogenic survival RBE calculations in proton therapy, offering a more mechanistic approach compared to phenomenological models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessio Parisi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States of America
| | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States of America
| | - Keith M Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Parisi A, Beltran CJ, Furutani KM. The Mayo Clinic Florida microdosimetric kinetic model of clonogenic survival: formalism and first benchmark against in vitro and in silico data. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac7375] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2022] [Accepted: 05/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. To develop a new model (Mayo Clinic Florida microdosimetric kinetic model, MCF MKM) capable of accurately describing the in vitro clonogenic survival at low and high linear energy transfer (LET) using single-event microdosimetric spectra in a single target. Methodology. The MCF MKM is based on the ‘post-processing average’ implementation of the non-Poisson microdosimetric kinetic model and includes a novel expression to compute the particle-specific quadratic-dependence of the cell survival with respect to dose (β of the linear-quadratic model). A new methodology to a priori calculate the mean radius of the MCF MKM subnuclear domains is also introduced. Lineal energy spectra were simulated with the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System (PHITS) for 1H, 4He, 12C, 20Ne, 40Ar, 56Fe, and 132Xe ions and used in combination with the MCF MKM to calculate the ion-specific LET-dependence of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts (V79 cell line) and human salivary gland tumor cells (HSG cell line). The results were compared with in vitro data from the Particle Irradiation Data Ensemble (PIDE) and in silico results of different models. The possibility of performing experiment-specific predictions to explain the scatter in the in vitro RBE data was also investigated. Finally, a sensitivity analysis on the model parameters is also included. Main results. The RBE values predicted with the MCF MKM were found to be in good agreement with the in vitro data for all tested conditions. Though all MCF MKM model parameters were determined a priori, the accuracy of the MCF MKM was found to be comparable or superior to that of other models. The model parameters determined a priori were in good agreement with the ones obtained by fitting all available in vitro data. Significance. The MCF MKM will be considered for implementation in cancer radiotherapy treatment planning with accelerated ions.
Collapse
|
4
|
Gray TM, David S, Bassiri N, Patel DY, Kirby N, Mayer KM. Microdosimetric and radiobiological effects of gold nanoparticles at therapeutic radiation energies. Int J Radiat Biol 2022; 99:308-317. [PMID: 35709481 PMCID: PMC10089366 DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2022.2087931] [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: 09/25/2021] [Revised: 05/14/2022] [Accepted: 05/30/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to quantify the microscopic dose distribution surrounding gold nanoparticles (GNPs) irradiated at therapeutic energies and to measure the changes in cell survival in vitro caused by this dose enhancement. METHODS The dose distributions from secondary electrons surrounding a single gold nanosphere and single gold nanocube of equal volume were both simulated using MCNP6. Dose enhancement factors (DEFs) in the 1 μm3 volume surrounding a GNP were calculated and compared between a nanosphere and nanocube and between 6 and 18 MV energies. This microscopic effect was explored further by experimentally measuring the cell survival of C-33a cervical cancer cells irradiated at 18 MV with varying doses of energy and concentrations of GNPs. Survival of cells receiving no irradiation, a 3 Gy dose, and a 6 Gy dose of 18 MV energy were determined for each concentration of GNPs. RESULTS It was observed that the dose from electrons surrounding the gold nanocube surpasses that of a gold nanosphere up to a distance of 1.1 μm by 18.5% for the 18 MV energy spectrum and by 23.1% for the 6 MV spectrum. DEFs ranging from ∼2 to 8 were found, with the maximum DEF resulting from the case of the gold nanocube irradiated at 6 MV energy. Experimentally, for irradiation at 18 MV, incubating cells with 6 nM (0.10% gold by mass) GNPs produces an average 6.7% decrease in cell survival, and incubating cells with 9 nM (0.15% gold by mass) GNPs produces an average 14.6% decrease in cell survival, as compared to cells incubated and irradiated without GNPs. CONCLUSION We have successfully demonstrated the potential radiation dose enhancing effects in vitro and microdosimetrically from gold nanoparticles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tara M Gray
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Shaquan David
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Nema Bassiri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | | | - Neil Kirby
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Kathryn M Mayer
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Liew H, Meister S, Mein S, Tessonnier T, Kopp B, Held T, Haberer T, Abdollahi A, Debus J, Dokic I, Mairani A. Combined DNA Damage Repair Interference and Ion Beam Therapy: Development, Benchmark, and Clinical Implications of a Mechanistic Biological Model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 112:802-817. [PMID: 34710524 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.09.048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2021] [Revised: 09/10/2021] [Accepted: 09/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our purpose was to develop a mechanistic model that describes and predicts radiation response after combined DNA damage repair interference (DDRi) and particle radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS The heterogeneous dose distributions of protons and 4He ions were implemented into the "UNIfied and VERSatile bio-response Engine" (UNIVERSE). Predictions for monoenergetic and mixed fields over clinically relevant dose and linear energy transfer range were compared with experimental in vitro survival data measured in this work as well as data available in the literature, including different cell lines and DDR interferences. Ultimately, UNIVERSE predictions were investigated in a patient plan. RESULTS UNIVERSE accurately predicts survival of cell lines with and without DDRi in clinical settings of ion beam therapy based only on 3 parameters derived from photon data. With increasing dose or linear energy transfer, the radiosensitizing effect of DDRi decreases, resulting in diminished relative biological effect of ion beam radiation for cells subjected to DDRi in comparison to cells that are not. Similar trends were observed in patient plan recalculations; however, this analysis also suggests that DDRi + particle radiation therapy may better preserve the therapeutic window in comparison to DDRi + photon radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS The presented framework represents the first mechanistic model of combined DDRi and particle radiation therapy comprehensively benchmarked in clinically relevant scenarios and a step toward more personalized treatment. It reveals potential differences between DDRi + photon radiation therapy versus DDRi + particle radiation therapy, which have not been described so far. UNIVERSE could aid in appraising the clinical viability of combined administration of radiosensitizing drugs and charged particle therapy, as well as the identification of patients with known DDR deficiencies in the tumor who might benefit from therapy with light ions, freeing limited space at heavy ion therapy centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hans Liew
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sarah Meister
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Biology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stewart Mein
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Benedikt Kopp
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), University Hospital Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Haberer
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Amir Abdollahi
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), University Hospital Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ivana Dokic
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andrea Mairani
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; National Centre of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), Medical Physics, Pavia, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
McMahon SJ, Prise KM. A Mechanistic DNA Repair and Survival Model (Medras): Applications to Intrinsic Radiosensitivity, Relative Biological Effectiveness and Dose-Rate. Front Oncol 2021; 11:689112. [PMID: 34268120 PMCID: PMC8276175 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.689112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 05/31/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Variations in the intrinsic radiosensitivity of different cells to ionizing radiation is now widely believed to be a significant driver in differences in response to radiotherapy. While the mechanisms of radiosensitivity have been extensively studied in the laboratory, there are a lack of models which integrate this knowledge into a predictive framework. This paper presents an overview of the Medras model, which has been developed to provide a mechanistic framework in which different radiation responses can be modelled and individual responses predicted. This model simulates the repair of radiation-induced DNA damage, incorporating the overall kinetics of repair and its fidelity, to predict a range of biological endpoints including residual DNA damage, mutation, chromosome aberration, and cell death. Validation of this model against a range of exposure types is presented, including considerations of varying radiation qualities and dose-rates. This approach has the potential to inform new tools to deliver mechanistic predictions of radiation sensitivity, and support future developments in treatment personalization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen Joseph McMahon
- Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|