1
|
Small KL, Henthorn NT, Angal-Kalinin D, Chadwick AL, Santina E, Aitkenhead A, Kirkby KJ, Smith RJ, Surman M, Jones J, Farabolini W, Corsini R, Gamba D, Gilardi A, Merchant MJ, Jones RM. Evaluating very high energy electron RBE from nanodosimetric pBR322 plasmid DNA damage. Sci Rep 2021; 11:3341. [PMID: 33558553 PMCID: PMC7870938 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-82772-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2020] [Accepted: 12/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
This paper presents the first plasmid DNA irradiations carried out with Very High Energy Electrons (VHEE) over 100-200 MeV at the CLEAR user facility at CERN to determine the Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) of VHEE. DNA damage yields were measured in dry and aqueous environments to determine that ~ 99% of total DNA breaks were caused by indirect effects, consistent with other published measurements for protons and photons. Double-Strand Break (DSB) yield was used as the biological endpoint for RBE calculation, with values found to be consistent with established radiotherapy modalities. Similarities in physical damage between VHEE and conventional modalities gives confidence that biological effects of VHEE will also be similar-key for clinical implementation. Damage yields were used as a baseline for track structure simulations of VHEE plasmid irradiation using GEANT4-DNA. Current models for DSB yield have shown reasonable agreement with experimental values. The growing interest in FLASH radiotherapy motivated a study into DSB yield variation with dose rate following VHEE irradiation. No significant variations were observed between conventional and FLASH dose rate irradiations, indicating that no FLASH effect is seen under these conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K L Small
- The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
- The Cockcroft Institute, Daresbury, UK.
| | - N T Henthorn
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - D Angal-Kalinin
- The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Cockcroft Institute, Daresbury, UK
- ASTeC, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, Warrington, UK
| | - A L Chadwick
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - E Santina
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - A Aitkenhead
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - K J Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - R J Smith
- The Cockcroft Institute, Daresbury, UK
- ASTeC, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, Warrington, UK
| | - M Surman
- The Cockcroft Institute, Daresbury, UK
- ASTeC, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, Warrington, UK
| | - J Jones
- The Cockcroft Institute, Daresbury, UK
- ASTeC, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, Warrington, UK
| | - W Farabolini
- CERN, Geneva, Switzerland
- CEA Saclay, IRFU-DACM, Saclay, France
| | | | | | - A Gilardi
- CERN, Geneva, Switzerland
- Federico II, DIETI, University of Napoli, Napoli, Italy
| | - M J Merchant
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - R M Jones
- The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Cockcroft Institute, Daresbury, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Smith EAK, Henthorn NT, Warmenhoven JW, Ingram SP, Aitkenhead AH, Richardson JC, Sitch P, Chadwick AL, Underwood TSA, Merchant MJ, Burnet NG, Kirkby NF, Kirkby KJ, Mackay RI. In Silico Models of DNA Damage and Repair in Proton Treatment Planning: A Proof of Concept. Sci Rep 2019; 9:19870. [PMID: 31882690 PMCID: PMC6934522 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-56258-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2019] [Accepted: 11/29/2019] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
There is strong in vitro cell survival evidence that the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons is variable, with dependence on factors such as linear energy transfer (LET) and dose. This is coupled with the growing in vivo evidence, from post-treatment image change analysis, of a variable RBE. Despite this, a constant RBE of 1.1 is still applied as a standard in proton therapy. However, there is a building clinical interest in incorporating a variable RBE. Recently, correlations summarising Monte Carlo-based mechanistic models of DNA damage and repair with absorbed dose and LET have been published as the Manchester mechanistic (MM) model. These correlations offer an alternative path to variable RBE compared to the more standard phenomenological models. In this proof of concept work, these correlations have been extended to acquire RBE-weighted dose distributions and calculated, along with other RBE models, on a treatment plan. The phenomenological and mechanistic models for RBE have been shown to produce comparable results with some differences in magnitude and relative distribution. The mechanistic model found a large RBE for misrepair, which phenomenological models are unable to do. The potential of the MM model to predict multiple endpoints presents a clear advantage over phenomenological models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward A K Smith
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. .,Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
| | - N T Henthorn
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - J W Warmenhoven
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - S P Ingram
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - A H Aitkenhead
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - J C Richardson
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - P Sitch
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - A L Chadwick
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - T S A Underwood
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - M J Merchant
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - N G Burnet
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - N F Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - K J Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - R I Mackay
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|