1
|
Rødland GE, Temelie M, Eek Mariampillai A, Hauge S, Gilbert A, Chevalier F, Savu DI, Syljuåsen RG. Potential Benefits of Combining Proton or Carbon Ion Therapy with DNA Damage Repair Inhibitors. Cells 2024; 13:1058. [PMID: 38920686 DOI: 10.3390/cells13121058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2024] [Revised: 06/03/2024] [Accepted: 06/05/2024] [Indexed: 06/27/2024] Open
Abstract
The use of charged particle radiotherapy is currently increasing, but combination therapy with DNA repair inhibitors remains to be exploited in the clinic. The high-linear energy transfer (LET) radiation delivered by charged particles causes clustered DNA damage, which is particularly effective in destroying cancer cells. Whether the DNA damage response to this type of damage is different from that elicited in response to low-LET radiation, and if and how it can be targeted to increase treatment efficacy, is not fully understood. Although several preclinical studies have reported radiosensitizing effects when proton or carbon ion irradiation is combined with inhibitors of, e.g., PARP, ATR, ATM, or DNA-PKcs, further exploration is required to determine the most effective treatments. Here, we examine what is known about repair pathway choice in response to high- versus low-LET irradiation, and we discuss the effects of inhibitors of these pathways when combined with protons and carbon ions. Additionally, we explore the potential effects of DNA repair inhibitors on antitumor immune signaling upon proton and carbon ion irradiation. Due to the reduced effect on healthy tissue and better immune preservation, particle therapy may be particularly well suited for combination with DNA repair inhibitors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gro Elise Rødland
- Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, 0379 Oslo, Norway
| | - Mihaela Temelie
- Department of Life and Environmental Physics, Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, 077125 Magurele, Romania
| | - Adrian Eek Mariampillai
- Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, 0379 Oslo, Norway
| | - Sissel Hauge
- Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, 0379 Oslo, Norway
| | - Antoine Gilbert
- UMR6252 CIMAP, Team Applications in Radiobiology with Accelerated Ions, CEA-CNRS-ENSICAEN-Université de Caen Normandie, 14000 Caen, France
| | - François Chevalier
- UMR6252 CIMAP, Team Applications in Radiobiology with Accelerated Ions, CEA-CNRS-ENSICAEN-Université de Caen Normandie, 14000 Caen, France
| | - Diana I Savu
- Department of Life and Environmental Physics, Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, 077125 Magurele, Romania
| | - Randi G Syljuåsen
- Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, 0379 Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dutta P, Pal D, Sultana F, Mandal RK, Roy A, Panda CK. Down-regulation of FA-BRCA Pathway in Cervical Carcinoma Gradually Reversed During the Development of Chemo-tolerance: Clinical Implications. Reprod Sci 2024; 31:1122-1138. [PMID: 38012520 DOI: 10.1007/s43032-023-01378-7] [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: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 11/29/2023]
Abstract
Cervical cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death among females, worldwide. The contributory role of different cellular pathways in the process of carcinogenesis is still poorly understood. Our study was focused here to understand the functional evaluation of key regulatory genes of FA-BRCA pathway in the development of CACX and their role in chemo-tolerance of the disease by analyzing the molecular profile of the genes both in normal and tumour tissue of our sample pool, also validated in in silico datasets. Later on, prognostic importance of the genes was further evaluated in plasma DNA and cisplatin-treated in vitro system. We found that expression profile of FA-BRCA pathway genes was gradually reduced from undifferentiated basal-parabasal layers of normal tissue towards the progression of the disease. Further analysis revealed that frequent promoter methylation [32-55%] and deletion [34-52%] events were the plausible reasons for their reduced expression in CACX. Noticeably, invasion of promoter methylation of the genes [11-17%] in plasma CTCs of CACX patients was positively correlated [p < 0.001] with poor prognosis among patients. On the other hand, functional upregulation of these genes at higher concentrations [IC50-70] of cisplatin was a predictor for the development of drug tolerance, as evaluated in our in vitro study. This finding was supported further by low prevalence of γ-H2X foci formation and reduced expression of DNMT1 at higher concentrations of cisplatin. In totality, we discovered that the FA-BRCA pathway must be inactivated for cancer formation. In contrast, elevated gene expression played a substantial role in building of chemo-tolerance and might be associated with developing increased risk of disease recurrence among patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Priyanka Dutta
- Department of Oncogene Regulation, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, 37, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata, 700026, West Bengal, India
| | - Debolina Pal
- Department of Oncogene Regulation, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, 37, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata, 700026, West Bengal, India
| | - Farhin Sultana
- Department of Oncogene Regulation, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, 37, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata, 700026, West Bengal, India
| | - Ranajit Kumar Mandal
- Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, 37, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata, 700026, West Bengal, India
| | - Anup Roy
- Department of Pathology, Nil Ratan Sircar Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, 700014, India
| | - Chinmay Kumar Panda
- Department of Oncogene Regulation, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, 37, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata, 700026, West Bengal, India.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Muñoz ID, García-Calderón D, Felix-Bautista R, Burigo LN, Christensen JB, Brons S, Runz A, Häring P, Greilich S, Seco J, Jäkel O. Linear Energy Transfer Measurements and Estimation of Relative Biological Effectiveness in Proton and Helium Ion Beams Using Fluorescent Nuclear Track Detectors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)00357-2. [PMID: 38437925 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.02.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/06/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our objective was to develop a methodology for assessing the linear energy transfer (LET) and relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in clinical proton and helium ion beams using fluorescent nuclear track detectors (FNTDs). METHODS AND MATERIALS FNTDs were exposed behind solid water to proton and helium (4He) ion spread-out Bragg peaks. Detectors were imaged with a confocal microscope, and the LET spectra were derived from the fluorescence intensity. The track- and dose-averaged LET (LETF and LETD, respectively) were calculated from the LET spectra. LET measurements were used as input on RBE models to estimate the RBE. Human alveolar adenocarcinoma cells (A549) were exposed at the same positions as the FNTDs. The RBE was calculated from the resulting survival curves. All measurements were compared with Monte Carlo simulations. RESULTS For protons, average relative differences between measurements and simulations were 6% and 19% for LETF and LETD, respectively. For helium ions, the same differences were 11% for both quantities. The position of the experimental LET spectra primary peaks agreed with the simulations within 9% and 14% for protons and helium ions, respectively. For the RBE models using LETD as input, FNTD-based RBE values ranged from 1.02 ± 0.01 to 1.25 ± 0.04 and from 1.08 ± 0.09 to 2.68 ± 1.26 for protons and helium ions, respectively. The average relative differences between these values and simulations were 2% and 4%. For A549 cells, the RBE ranged from 1.05 ± 0.07 to 1.47 ± 0.09 and from 0.89 ± 0.06 to 3.28 ± 0.20 for protons and helium ions, respectively. Regarding the RBE-weighted dose (2.0 Gy at the spread-out Bragg peak), the differences between simulations and measurements were below 0.10 Gy. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates for the first time that FNTDs can be used to perform direct LET measurements and to estimate the RBE in clinical proton and helium ion beams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iván D Muñoz
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Daniel García-Calderón
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Biomedical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Renato Felix-Bautista
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lucas N Burigo
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jeppe Brage Christensen
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Stephan Brons
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Armin Runz
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Peter Häring
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Steffen Greilich
- Berthold Technologies GmbH & Co KG, Units of Radiation Protection and Bioanalytics, Bad Wildbad, Germany
| | - Joao Seco
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Biomedical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Guerra Liberal FDC, Parsons JL, McMahon SJ. Most DNA repair defects do not modify the relationship between relative biological effectiveness and linear energy transfer in CRISPR-edited cells. Med Phys 2024; 51:591-600. [PMID: 37753877 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16764] [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: 06/29/2023] [Revised: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/15/2023] [Indexed: 09/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer is a highly heterogeneous disease, driven by frequent genetic alterations which have significant effects on radiosensitivity. However, radiotherapy for a given cancer type is typically given with a standard dose determined from population-level trials. As a result, a proportion of patients are under- or over-dosed, reducing the clinical benefit of radiotherapy. Biological optimization would not only allow individual dose prescription but also a more efficient allocation of limited resources, such as proton and carbon ion therapy. Proton and ion radiotherapy offer an advantage over photons due to their elevated Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) resulting from their elevated Linear Energy Transfer (LET). Despite significant interest in optimizing LET by tailoring radiotherapy plans, RBE's genetic dependence remains unclear. PURPOSE The aim of this study is to better define the RBE/LET relationship in a panel of cell lines with different defects in DSB repair pathways, but otherwise identical biological features and genetic background to isolate these effects. METHODS Normal human cells (RPE1), genetically modified to introduce defects in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair genes, ATM, BRCA1, DCLRE1C, LIG4, PRKDC and TP53, were used to map the RBE-LET relationship. Cell survival was measured with clonogenic assays after exposure to photons, protons (LET 1 and 12 keV/µm) and alpha particles (129 keV/µm). Gene knockout sensitizer enhancement ratio (SER) values were calculated as the ratio of the mean inactivation dose (MID) of wild-type cells to repair-deficient cells, and RBE values were calculated as the ratio of the MID of X-ray and particle irradiated cells. 53BP1 foci were used to quantify radiation-induced DSBs and their repair following irradiation. RESULTS Deletion of NHEJ genes had the greatest impact on photon sensitivity (ATM-/- SER = 2.0 and Lig4-/- SER = 1.8), with genes associated with HR having smaller effects (BRCA1-/- SER = 1.2). Wild-type cells showed RBEs of 1.1, 1.3, 5.0 for low- and high-LET protons and alpha particles respectively. SERs for different genes were independent of LET, apart from NHEJ knockouts which proved to be markedly hypersensitive across all tested LETs. Due to this hypersensitivity, the impact of high LET was reduced in cell models lacking the NHEJ repair pathway. HR-defective cells had moderately increased sensitivity across all tested LETs, but, notably, the contribution of HR pathway to survival appeared independent of LET. Analysis of 53BP1 foci shows that NHEJ-defective cells had the least DSB repair capacity after low LET exposure, and no visible repair after high LET exposure. HR-defective cells also had slower repair kinetics, but the impact of HR defects is not as severe as NHEJ defects. CONCLUSIONS DSB repair defects, particularly in NHEJ, conferred significant radiosensitivity across all LETs. This sensitization appeared independent of LET, suggesting that the contribution of different DNA repair pathways to survival does not depend on radiation quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jason L Parsons
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Stephen J McMahon
- The Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Xiang J, Ma L, Tong J, Zuo N, Hu W, Luo Y, Liu J, Liang T, Ren Q, Liu Q. Boron-peptide conjugates with angiopep-2 for boron neutron capture therapy. Front Med (Lausanne) 2023; 10:1199881. [PMID: 37324130 PMCID: PMC10267362 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1199881] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 05/15/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) induces intracellular nuclear reaction to destroy cancer cells during thermal neutron irradiation. To selectively eliminate cancer cells but avoid harmful effects on normal tissues, novel boron-peptide conjugates with angiopep-2, namely ANG-B, were constructed and evaluated in preclinical settings. Boron-peptide conjugates were synthesized using solid-phase peptide synthesis, and the molecular mass was validated by mass spectrometry afterwards. Boron concentrations in 6 cancer cell lines and an intracranial glioma mouse model after treatments were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Phenylalanine (BPA) was tested in parallel for comparison. In vitro treatment with boron delivery peptides significantly increased boron uptake in cancer cells. BNCT with 5 mM ANG-B caused 86.5% ± 5.3% of clonogenic cell death, while BPA at the same concentration caused 73.3% ± 6.0% clonogenic cell death. The in vivo effect of ANG-B in an intracranial glioma mouse model was evaluated by PET/CT imaging at 31 days after BNCT. The mouse glioma tumours in the ANG-B-treated group were shrunk by 62.9% on average, while the BPA-treated tumours shrank by only 23.0%. Therefore, ANG-B is an efficient boron delivery agent, which has low cytotoxicity and high tumour-to-blood ratio. Based on these experimental results, we expected that ANG-B may leverage BNCT performance in clinical applications in future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Xiang
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen, China
| | - Lin Ma
- Department of Stomatology, General Hospital, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
| | - Jianfei Tong
- Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing, China
- Spallation Neutron Source Science Center, Dongguan, China
| | - Nan Zuo
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
- Department of Stomatology, The First Hospital, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Weitao Hu
- School of Stomatology, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Yupeng Luo
- School of Stomatology, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
| | - Junqi Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Tianjiao Liang
- Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing, China
- Spallation Neutron Source Science Center, Dongguan, China
| | - Qiushi Ren
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen, China
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
| | - Qi Liu
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
- International Cancer Center, Shenzhen University School of Medicine, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wei B, Zheng J, Jiang C, Zhang H, Zhang M, Cheng T, Li J, Wang Z, Deng L, Wang L, Xia Q, Ma J. Improved detection of homologous recombination deficiency in Chinese patients with ovarian cancer: a novel non-exonic single-nucleotide polymorphism-based next-generation sequencing panel. Mol Oncol 2023. [PMID: 36852736 PMCID: PMC10399708 DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.13411] [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: 09/07/2022] [Revised: 01/18/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2023] [Indexed: 03/01/2023] Open
Abstract
As homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) is a biomarker to predict the efficiency of PARP inhibitor treatment, this study developed a non-exonic single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based targeted next-generation sequencing panel and comprehensively examined it both on standard and clinical ovarian cancer tissues. The HRD scores calculated by the panel and whole-genome sequencing were consistent, with the analysis by sequenza being the most reliable. The results on clinical samples revealed that the panel performed better in HRD analysis compared with the SNP microarray. There are several distinctions between this newly developed kit and reported HRD detection panels. First, the panel covers only 52 592 SNPs, which makes it capable of detecting genomic instability. Secondly, all the SNPs are non-exonic; as a result, the panel can be used cooperatively with any exon panel. Thirdly, all the SNPs selected have a high minor allele frequency in Chinese people, making it a better choice for HRD detection in Chinese patients. In summary, this panel shows promise as a clinical application to guide PARP inhibitors or platinum drugs used in the treatment of ovarian and other cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bing Wei
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Jinxiang Zheng
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Cai Jiang
- Nanodigmbio (Nanjing) Biotechnology Co., Ltd., China
| | - He Zhang
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Mingye Zhang
- Nanodigmbio (Nanjing) Biotechnology Co., Ltd., China
| | - Taoran Cheng
- Nanodigmbio (Nanjing) Biotechnology Co., Ltd., China
| | - Jun Li
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Zhizhong Wang
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Lijun Deng
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Li Wang
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Qingxin Xia
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| | - Jie Ma
- Department of Molecular Pathology, Henan Key Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Zhengzhou, China.,The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Jennrich S, Pelzer M, Tertel T, Koska B, Vüllings M, Thakur BK, Jendrossek V, Timmermann B, Giebel B, Rudner J. CD9- and CD81-positive extracellular vesicles provide a marker to monitor glioblastoma cell response to photon-based and proton-based radiotherapy. Front Oncol 2022; 12:947439. [PMID: 36203458 PMCID: PMC9530604 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.947439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most aggressive tumor of the central nervous system with a poor prognosis. In the treatment of GBM tumors, radiotherapy plays a major role. Typically, GBM tumors cannot be cured by irradiation because of intrinsic resistance machanisms. An escalation of the irradiation dose in the GBM tumor is difficult due to the high risk of severe side effects in the brain. In the last decade, the development of new irradiation techniques, including proton-based irradiation, promised new chances in the treatment of brain tumors. In contrast to conventional radiotherapy, irradiation with protons allows a dosimetrically more confined dose deposition in the tumor while better sparing the normal tissue surrounding the tumor. A systematic comparison of both irradiation techniques on glioblastoma cells has not been performed so far. Despite the improvements in radiotherapy, it remains challenging to predict the therapeutical response of GBM tumors. Recent publications suggest extracellular vesicles (EVs) as promising markers predicting tumor response. Being part of an ancient intercellular communication system, virtually all cells release specifically composed EVs. The assembly of EVs varies between cell types and depends on environmental parameters. Here, we compared the impact of photon-based with proton-based radiotherapy on cell viability and phenotype of four different glioblastoma cell lines. Furthermore, we characterized EVs released by different glioblastoma cells and correlated released EVs with the cellular response to radiotherapy. Our results demonstrated that glioblastoma cells reacted more sensitive to irradiation with protons than photons, while radiation-induced cell death 72 h after single dose irradiation was independent of the irradiation modality. Moreover, we detected CD9 and CD81-positive EVs in the supernatant of all glioblastoma cells, although at different concentrations. The amount of released CD9 and CD81-positive EVs increased after irradiation when cells became apoptotic. Although secreted EVs of non-irradiated cells were not predictive for radiosensitivity, their increased EV release after irradiation correlated with the cytotoxic response to radiotherapy 72 h after irradiation. Thus, our data suggest a novel application of EVs in the surveillance of anti-cancer therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Jennrich
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Martin Pelzer
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Tobias Tertel
- Institute for Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Benjamin Koska
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Melanie Vüllings
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Basant Kumar Thakur
- Department of Pediatrics III, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Verena Jendrossek
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Bernd Giebel
- Institute for Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Justine Rudner
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
- *Correspondence: Justine Rudner,
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Flint DB, Ruff CE, Bright SJ, Yepes P, Wang Q, Manandhar M, Kacem MB, Turner BX, Martinus DKJ, Shaitelman SF, Sawakuchi GO. An empirical model of proton RBE based on the linear correlation between x-ray and proton radiosensitivity. Med Phys 2022; 49:6221-6236. [PMID: 35831779 PMCID: PMC10360139 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15850] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2022] [Revised: 06/12/2022] [Accepted: 06/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE) is known to depend on physical factors of the proton beam, such as its linear energy transfer (LET), as well as on cell-line specific biological factors, such as their ability to repair DNA damage. However, in a clinical setting, proton RBE is still considered to have a fixed value of 1.1 despite the existence of several empirical models that can predict proton RBE based on how a cell's survival curve (linear-quadratic model [LQM]) parameters α and β vary with the LET of the proton beam. Part of the hesitation to incorporate variable RBE models in the clinic is due to the great noise in the biological datasets on which these models are trained, often making it unclear which model, if any, provides sufficiently accurate RBE predictions to warrant a departure from RBE = 1.1. PURPOSE Here, we introduce a novel model of proton RBE based on how a cell's intrinsic radiosensitivity varies with LET, rather than its LQM parameters. METHODS AND MATERIALS We performed clonogenic cell survival assays for eight cell lines exposed to 6 MV x-rays and 1.2, 2.6, or 9.9 keV/µm protons, and combined our measurements with published survival data (n = 397 total cell line/LET combinations). We characterized how radiosensitivity metrics of the form DSF% , (the dose required to achieve survival fraction [SF], e.g., D10% ) varied with proton LET, and calculated the Bayesian information criteria associated with different LET-dependent functions to determine which functions best described the underlying trends. This allowed us to construct a six-parameter model that predicts cells' proton survival curves based on the LET dependence of their radiosensitivity, rather than the LET dependence of the LQM parameters themselves. We compared the accuracy of our model to previously established empirical proton RBE models, and implemented our model within a clinical treatment plan evaluation workflow to demonstrate its feasibility in a clinical setting. RESULTS Our analyses of the trends in the data show that DSF% is linearly correlated between x-rays and protons, regardless of the choice of the survival level (e.g., D10% , D37% , or D50% are similarly correlated), and that the slope and intercept of these correlations vary with proton LET. The model we constructed based on these trends predicts proton RBE within 15%-30% at the 68.3% confidence level and offers a more accurate general description of the experimental data than previously published empirical models. In the context of a clinical treatment plan, our model generally predicted higher RBE-weighted doses than the other empirical models, with RBE-weighted doses in the distal portion of the field being up to 50.7% higher than the planned RBE-weighted doses (RBE = 1.1) to the tumor. CONCLUSIONS We established a new empirical proton RBE model that is more accurate than previous empirical models, and that predicts much higher RBE values in the distal edge of clinical proton beams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David B. Flint
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Chase E. Ruff
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Scott J. Bright
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Pablo Yepes
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
- Department of Physics and AstronomyRice UniversityHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Qianxia Wang
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
- Department of Physics and AstronomyRice UniversityHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Mandira Manandhar
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Mariam Ben Kacem
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Broderick X. Turner
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical SciencesHoustonTexasUSA
| | - David K. J. Martinus
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical SciencesHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Simona F. Shaitelman
- Department of Radiation OncologyThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
| | - Gabriel O. Sawakuchi
- Department of Radiation PhysicsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexasUSA
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical SciencesHoustonTexasUSA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Mairani A, Mein S, Blakely E, Debus J, Durante M, Ferrari A, Fuchs H, Georg D, Grosshans DR, Guan F, Haberer T, Harrabi S, Horst F, Inaniwa T, Karger CP, Mohan R, Paganetti H, Parodi K, Sala P, Schuy C, Tessonnier T, Titt U, Weber U. Roadmap: helium ion therapy. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [PMID: 35395649 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac65d3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Helium ion beam therapy for the treatment of cancer was one of several developed and studied particle treatments in the 1950s, leading to clinical trials beginning in 1975 at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The trial shutdown was followed by decades of research and clinical silence on the topic while proton and carbon ion therapy made debuts at research facilities and academic hospitals worldwide. The lack of progression in understanding the principle facets of helium ion beam therapy in terms of physics, biological and clinical findings persists today, mainly attributable to its highly limited availability. Despite this major setback, there is an increasing focus on evaluating and establishing clinical and research programs using helium ion beams, with both therapy and imaging initiatives to supplement the clinical palette of radiotherapy in the treatment of aggressive disease and sensitive clinical cases. Moreover, due its intermediate physical and radio-biological properties between proton and carbon ion beams, helium ions may provide a streamlined economic steppingstone towards an era of widespread use of different particle species in light and heavy ion therapy. With respect to the clinical proton beams, helium ions exhibit superior physical properties such as reduced lateral scattering and range straggling with higher relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and dose-weighted linear energy transfer (LETd) ranging from ∼4 keVμm-1to ∼40 keVμm-1. In the frame of heavy ion therapy using carbon, oxygen or neon ions, where LETdincreases beyond 100 keVμm-1, helium ions exhibit similar physical attributes such as a sharp lateral penumbra, however, with reduced radio-biological uncertainties and without potentially spoiling dose distributions due to excess fragmentation of heavier ion beams, particularly for higher penetration depths. This roadmap presents an overview of the current state-of-the-art and future directions of helium ion therapy: understanding physics and improving modeling, understanding biology and improving modeling, imaging techniques using helium ions and refining and establishing clinical approaches and aims from learned experience with protons. These topics are organized and presented into three main sections, outlining current and future tasks in establishing clinical and research programs using helium ion beams-A. Physics B. Biological and C. Clinical Perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- 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.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stewart Mein
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eleanor Blakely
- Biological Systems and Engineering Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, United States of America
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Marco Durante
- GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany.,Technische Universität Darmstadt, Institut für Physik Kondensierter Materie, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Alfredo Ferrari
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hermann Fuchs
- Division of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria.,MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Dietmar Georg
- Division of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria.,MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - David R Grosshans
- The University of Texas MD Anderson cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America
| | - Fada Guan
- The University of Texas MD Anderson cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America.,Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06510, United States of America
| | - Thomas Haberer
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Felix Horst
- GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Taku Inaniwa
- Department of Accelerator and Medical Physics, Institute for Quantum Medical Science, QST, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.,Medical Physics Laboratory, Division of Health Science, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, 1-7 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
| | - Christian P Karger
- National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Radhe Mohan
- The University of Texas MD Anderson cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States of America.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States of America
| | - Katia Parodi
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Department of Experimental Physics-Medical Physics, Munich, Germany
| | - Paola Sala
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Department of Experimental Physics-Medical Physics, Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Schuy
- GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Uwe Titt
- The University of Texas MD Anderson cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America
| | - Ulrich Weber
- GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Valdes‐Cortez C, Niatsetski Y, Perez‐Calatayud J, Ballester F, Vijande J. A Monte Carlo study of the relative biological effectiveness in surface brachytherapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:5576-5588. [DOI: 10.1002/mp.15774] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2022] [Revised: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 05/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Yury Niatsetski
- R&D Elekta Brachytherapy Waardgelder 1, 3905 TH Veenendaal The Netherlands
| | - Jose Perez‐Calatayud
- Unidad Mixta de Investigación en Radiofísica e Instrumentación Nuclear en Medicina (IRIMED) Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (IIS‐La Fe)‐Universitat de Valencia (UV)
- Radiotherapy Department La Fe Hospital Valencia Spain
- Radiotherapy Department Hospital Clinica Benidorm Alicante Spain
| | - Facundo Ballester
- Unidad Mixta de Investigación en Radiofísica e Instrumentación Nuclear en Medicina (IRIMED) Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (IIS‐La Fe)‐Universitat de Valencia (UV)
- Department of Atomic, Molecular and Nuclear Physics University of Valencia Burjassot Spain
| | - Javier Vijande
- Unidad Mixta de Investigación en Radiofísica e Instrumentación Nuclear en Medicina (IRIMED) Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (IIS‐La Fe)‐Universitat de Valencia (UV)
- Department of Atomic, Molecular and Nuclear Physics University of Valencia Burjassot Spain
- Instituto de Física Corpuscular IFIC (UV‐CSIC) Burjassot Spain
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Mohan R. A review of proton therapy – Current status and future directions. PRECISION RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2022; 6:164-176. [DOI: 10.1002/pro6.1149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston Texas USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Deycmar S, Mara E, Kerschbaum-Gruber S, Waller V, Georg D, Pruschy M. Ganetespib selectively sensitizes cancer cells for proximal and distal spread-out Bragg peak proton irradiation. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:72. [PMID: 35410422 PMCID: PMC8996402 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02036-z] [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: 05/18/2021] [Accepted: 03/20/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective Hypersensitivity towards proton versus photon irradiation was demonstrated in homologous recombination repair (HRR)-deficient cell lines. Hence, combined treatment concepts targeting HRR provide a rational for potential pharmaceutical exploitation. The HSP90 inhibitor ganetespib (STA-9090) downregulates a multitude of HRR-associated proteins and sensitizes for certain chemotherapeutics. Thus, the radiosensitizing effect of HSP90-inhibiting ganetespib was investigated for reference photon irradiation and proton irradiation at a proximal and distal position in a spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP). Methods A549 and FaDu cells were treated with low-dose (2 nM resp. 1 nM) ganetespib and irradiated with 200 kV photons. Proton irradiation was performed at a proximal and a distal position within a SOBP, with corresponding dose-averaged linear-energy transfer (LETD) values of 2.1 and 4.5 keV/µm, respectively. Cellular survival data was fitted to the linear-quadratic model to calculate relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and the dose-modifying factor (DMF). Additionally, A549 cells were treated with increasing doses of ganetespib and investigated by flow cytometry, immunoblotting, and immunofluorescence microscopy to investigate cell cycle distribution, Rad51 protein levels, and γH2AX foci, respectively. Results Low-dosed ganetespib significantly sensitized both cancer cell lines exclusively for proton irradiation at both investigated LETD, resulting in increased RBE values of 10–40%. In comparison to photon irradiation, the fraction of cells in S/G2/M phase was elevated in response to proton irradiation with 10 nM ganetespib consistently reducing this population. No changes in cell cycle distribution were detected in unirradiated cells by ganetespib alone. Protein levels of Rad51 are downregulated in irradiated A549 cells by 10 nM and also 2 nM ganetespib within 24 h. Immunofluorescence staining demonstrated similar induction and removal of γH2AX foci, irrespective of irradiation type or ganetespib administration. Conclusion Our findings illustrate a proton-specific sensitizing effect of low-dosed ganetespib in both employed cell lines and at both investigated SOBP positions. We provide additional experimental data on cellular response and a rational for future combinatorial approaches with proton radiotherapy. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-022-02036-z.
Collapse
|
13
|
Xiang J, Ma L, Gu Z, Jin H, Zhai H, Tong J, Liang T, Li J, Ren Q, Liu Q. A Boronated Derivative of Temozolomide Showing Enhanced Efficacy in Boron Neutron Capture Therapy of Glioblastoma. Cells 2022; 11:cells11071173. [PMID: 35406737 PMCID: PMC8998031 DOI: 10.3390/cells11071173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2022] [Revised: 03/21/2022] [Accepted: 03/24/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
There is an incontestable need for improved treatment modality for glioblastoma due to its extraordinary resistance to traditional chemoradiation therapy. Boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) may play a role in the future. We designed and synthesized a 10B-boronated derivative of temozolomide, TMZB. BNCT was carried out with a total neutron radiation fluence of 2.4 ± 0.3 × 1011 n/cm2. The effects of TMZB in BNCT were measured with a clonogenic cell survival assay in vitro and PET/CT imaging in vivo. Then, 10B-boronated phenylalanine (BPA) was tested in parallel with TMZB for comparison. The IC50 of TMZB for the cytotoxicity of clonogenic cells in HS683 was 0.208 mM, which is comparable to the IC50 of temozolomide at 0.213 mM. In BNCT treatment, 0.243 mM TMZB caused 91.2% ± 6.4% of clonogenic cell death, while 0.239 mM BPA eliminated 63.7% ± 6.3% of clonogenic cells. TMZB had a tumor-to-normal brain ratio of 2.9 ± 1.1 and a tumor-to-blood ratio of 3.8 ± 0.2 in a mouse glioblastoma model. BNCT with TMZB in this model caused 58.2% tumor shrinkage at 31 days after neutron irradiation, while the number for BPA was 35.2%. Therefore, by combining the effects of chemotherapy from temozolomide and radiotherapy with heavy charged particles from BNCT, TMZB-based BNCT exhibited promising potential for therapeutic applications in glioblastoma treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Xiang
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China;
- Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen 518132, China;
| | - Lin Ma
- Department of Stomatology, General Hospital, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518055, China;
| | - Zheng Gu
- Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen 518132, China;
| | - Hongjun Jin
- Guangdong Provincial Key Lab of Biomedical Imaging, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai 519000, China;
| | - Hongbin Zhai
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China;
| | - Jianfei Tong
- Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing 100049, China; (J.T.); (T.L.); (J.L.)
- Spallation Neutron Source Science Center, Dongguan 523803, China
| | - Tianjiao Liang
- Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing 100049, China; (J.T.); (T.L.); (J.L.)
- Spallation Neutron Source Science Center, Dongguan 523803, China
| | - Juan Li
- Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing 100049, China; (J.T.); (T.L.); (J.L.)
- Spallation Neutron Source Science Center, Dongguan 523803, China
| | - Qiushi Ren
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China;
- Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen 518132, China;
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China;
- Correspondence: (Q.R.); (Q.L.); Tel.: +86-0755-26038837 (Q.R. & Q.L.)
| | - Qi Liu
- Shenzhen Bay Laboratory, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen 518132, China;
- Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China;
- Correspondence: (Q.R.); (Q.L.); Tel.: +86-0755-26038837 (Q.R. & Q.L.)
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Kowalchuk RO, Corbin KS, Jimenez RB. Particle Therapy for Breast Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14041066. [PMID: 35205814 PMCID: PMC8870138 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14041066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2022] [Revised: 02/09/2022] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Particle therapy has received increasing attention in the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical properties that may enhance patient quality of life and reduce the late effects of therapy. In this review, we will examine the rationale for the use of proton and carbon therapy in the treatment of breast cancer and highlight their potential for sparing normal tissue injury. We will discuss the early dosimetric and clinical studies that have been pursued to date in this domain before focusing on the remaining open questions limiting the widespread adoption of particle therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roman O. Kowalchuk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA; (R.O.K.); (K.S.C.)
| | - Kimberly S. Corbin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA; (R.O.K.); (K.S.C.)
| | - Rachel B. Jimenez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
High-Throughput 3D Tumor Spheroid Array Platform for Evaluating Sensitivity of Proton-Drug Combinations. Int J Mol Sci 2022; 23:ijms23020587. [PMID: 35054773 PMCID: PMC8775525 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23020587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2021] [Revised: 12/25/2021] [Accepted: 01/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a critical treatment modality for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). However, not much is known about drug combinations that may improve the efficacy of PBT. This study aimed to test the feasibility of a three-dimensional (3D) tumor-spheroid-based high-throughput screening platform that could assess cellular sensitivity against PBT. Spheroids of two HNSCC cell lines—Fadu and Cal27—cultured with a mixture of Matrigel were arrayed on a 384-pillar/well plate, followed by exposure to graded doses of protons or targeted drugs including olaparib at various concentrations. Calcein staining of HNSCC spheroids revealed a dose-dependent decrease in cell viability for proton irradiation or multiple targeted drugs, and provided quantitative data that discriminated the sensitivity between the two HNSCC cell lines. The combined effect of protons and olaparib was assessed by calculating the combination index from the survival rates of 4 × 4 matrices, showing that Cal27 spheroids had greater synergy with olaparib than Fadu spheroids. In contrast, adavosertib did not synergize with protons in both spheroids. Taken together, we demonstrated that the 3D pillar/well array platform was a useful tool that provided rapid, quantitative data for evaluating sensitivity to PBT and drug combinations. Our results further supported that administration of the combination of PBT and olaparib may be an effective treatment strategy for HNSCC patients.
Collapse
|
16
|
Paganetti H. Mechanisms and Review of Clinical Evidence of Variations in Relative Biological Effectiveness in Proton Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 112:222-236. [PMID: 34407443 PMCID: PMC8688199 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2021] [Revised: 07/14/2021] [Accepted: 08/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Proton therapy is increasingly being used as a radiation therapy modality. There is uncertainty about the biological effectiveness of protons relative to photon therapies as it depends on several physical and biological parameters. Radiation oncology currently applies a constant and generic value for the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1, which was chosen conservatively to ensure tumor coverage. The use of a constant value has been challenged particularly when considering normal tissue constraints. Potential variations in RBE have been assessed in several published reviews but have mostly focused on data from clonogenic cell survival experiments with unclear relevance for clinical proton therapy. The goal of this review is to put in vitro findings in relation to clinical observations. Relevant in vivo pathways determining RBE for tumors and normal tissues are outlined, including not only damage to tumor cells and parenchyma but also vascular damage and immune response. Furthermore, the current clinical evidence of varying RBE is reviewed. The assessment can serve as guidance for treatment planning, personalized dose prescriptions, and outcome analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
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: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [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
|
18
|
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: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [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
|
19
|
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: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [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
|
20
|
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: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [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
|
21
|
Paganetti H, Grassberger C, Sharp GC. Physics of Particle Beam and Hypofractionated Beam Delivery in NSCLC. Semin Radiat Oncol 2021; 31:162-169. [PMID: 33610274 PMCID: PMC7905707 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2020.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
The dosimetric advantages of particle therapy lead to significantly reduced integral dose to normal tissues, making it an attractive treatment option for body sites such as the thorax. With reduced normal tissue dose comes the potential for dose escalation, toxicity reduction, or hypofractionation. While proton and heavy ion therapy have been used extensively for NSCLC, there are challenges in planning and delivery compared with X-ray-based radiation therapy. Particularly, range uncertainties compounded by breathing motion have to be considered. This article summarizes the current state of particle therapy for NSCLC with a specific focus on the impact of dosimetric uncertainties in planning and delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
| | - Clemens Grassberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Gregory C Sharp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Comparative Therapeutic Exploitability of Acute Adaptation Mechanisms to Photon and Proton Irradiation in 3D Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cell Cultures. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13061190. [PMID: 33801853 PMCID: PMC8000891 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13061190] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2020] [Revised: 02/23/2021] [Accepted: 03/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
For better tumor control, high-precision proton beam radiation therapy is currently being intensively discussed relative to conventional photon therapy. Here, we assumed that radiation type-specific molecular response profiles in more physiological 3D, matrix-based head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) cell cultures can be identified and therapeutically exploited. While proton irradiation revealed superimposable clonogenic survival and residual DNA double strand breaks (DSB) relative to photon irradiation, kinome profiles showed quantitative differences between both irradiation types. Pharmacological inhibition of a subset of radiation-induced kinases, predominantly belonging to the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) family, failed to sensitize HNSCC cells to either proton or photon irradiation. Likewise, inhibitors for ATM, DNA-PK and PARP did not discriminate between proton and photon irradiation but generally elicited a radiosensitization. Conclusively, our results suggest marginal cell line-specific differences in the radiosensitivity and DSB repair without a superiority of one radiation type over the other in 3D grown HNSCC cell cultures. Importantly, radiation-induced activity changes of cytoplasmic kinases induced during the first, acute phase of the cellular radiation response could neither be exploited for sensitization of HNSCC cells to photon nor proton irradiation.
Collapse
|
23
|
Paganetti H, Beltran C, Both S, Dong L, Flanz J, Furutani K, Grassberger C, Grosshans DR, Knopf AC, Langendijk JA, Nystrom H, Parodi K, Raaymakers BW, Richter C, Sawakuchi GO, Schippers M, Shaitelman SF, Teo BKK, Unkelbach J, Wohlfahrt P, Lomax T. Roadmap: proton therapy physics and biology. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abcd16] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2020] [Accepted: 11/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
24
|
Targeting the DNA replication stress phenotype of KRAS mutant cancer cells. Sci Rep 2021; 11:3656. [PMID: 33574444 PMCID: PMC7878884 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-83142-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Mutant KRAS is a common tumor driver and frequently confers resistance to anti-cancer treatments such as radiation. DNA replication stress in these tumors may constitute a therapeutic liability but is poorly understood. Here, using single-molecule DNA fiber analysis, we first characterized baseline replication stress in a panel of unperturbed isogenic and non-isogenic cancer cell lines. Correlating with the observed enhanced replication stress we found increased levels of cytosolic double-stranded DNA in KRAS mutant compared to wild-type cells. Yet, despite this phenotype replication stress-inducing agents failed to selectively impact KRAS mutant cells, which were protected by CHK1. Similarly, most exogenous stressors studied did not differentially augment cytosolic DNA accumulation in KRAS mutant compared to wild-type cells. However, we found that proton radiation was able to slow fork progression and preferentially induce fork stalling in KRAS mutant cells. Proton treatment also partly reversed the radioresistance associated with mutant KRAS. The cellular effects of protons in the presence of KRAS mutation clearly contrasted that of other drugs affecting replication, highlighting the unique nature of the underlying DNA damage caused by protons. Taken together, our findings provide insight into the replication stress response associated with mutated KRAS, which may ultimately yield novel therapeutic opportunities.
Collapse
|
25
|
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
|
26
|
Bronk L, Guan F, Patel D, Ma D, Kroger B, Wang X, Tran K, Yiu J, Stephan C, Debus J, Abdollahi A, Jäkel O, Mohan R, Titt U, Grosshans DR. Mapping the Relative Biological Effectiveness of Proton, Helium and Carbon Ions with High-Throughput Techniques. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12123658. [PMID: 33291477 PMCID: PMC7762185 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12123658] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2020] [Revised: 11/26/2020] [Accepted: 12/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Large amounts of high quality biophysical data are needed to improve current biological effects models but such data are lacking and difficult to obtain. The present study aimed to more efficiently measure the spatial distribution of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of charged particle beams using a novel high-accuracy and high-throughput experimental platform. Clonogenic survival was selected as the biological endpoint for two lung cancer cell lines, H460 and H1437, irradiated with protons, carbon, and helium ions. Ion-specific multi-step microplate holders were fabricated such that each column of a 96-well microplate is spatially situated at a different location along a particle beam path. Dose, dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd), and dose-mean lineal energy (yd) were calculated using an experimentally validated Geant4-based Monte Carlo system. Cells were irradiated at the Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT). The experimental results showed that the clonogenic survival curves of all tested ions were yd-dependent. Both helium and carbon ions achieved maximum RBEs within specific yd ranges before biological efficacy declined, indicating an overkill effect. For protons, no overkill was observed, but RBE increased distal to the Bragg peak. Measured RBE profiles strongly depend on the physical characteristics such as yd and are ion specific.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lawrence Bronk
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (L.B.); (B.K.); (K.T.); (J.Y.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
| | - Fada Guan
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
| | - Darshana Patel
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
| | - Duo Ma
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
| | - Benjamin Kroger
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (L.B.); (B.K.); (K.T.); (J.Y.)
| | - Xiaochun Wang
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
| | - Kevin Tran
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (L.B.); (B.K.); (K.T.); (J.Y.)
| | - Joycelyn Yiu
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (L.B.); (B.K.); (K.T.); (J.Y.)
| | - Clifford Stephan
- Texas A&M Institute of Biosciences and Technology High Throughput Research and Screening Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA;
| | - Jürgen Debus
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (J.D.); (A.A.); (O.J.)
| | - Amir Abdollahi
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (J.D.); (A.A.); (O.J.)
- Heidelberger Ionenstrahl Therapiezentrum, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; (J.D.); (A.A.); (O.J.)
- Heidelberger Ionenstrahl Therapiezentrum, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
| | - Uwe Titt
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (F.G.); (D.P.); (D.M.); (X.W.); (R.M.)
- Correspondence: (U.T.); (D.R.G.); Tel.: +1-713-563-2558 (U.T.); +1-713-745-8795 (D.R.G.)
| | - David R. Grosshans
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (L.B.); (B.K.); (K.T.); (J.Y.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
- Correspondence: (U.T.); (D.R.G.); Tel.: +1-713-563-2558 (U.T.); +1-713-745-8795 (D.R.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Görte J, Beyreuther E, Danen EHJ, Cordes N. Comparative Proton and Photon Irradiation Combined with Pharmacological Inhibitors in 3D Pancreatic Cancer Cultures. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12113216. [PMID: 33142778 PMCID: PMC7692858 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12113216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2020] [Revised: 10/23/2020] [Accepted: 10/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Due to higher precision and consequent sparing of normal tissue, pancreatic cancer patients might profit from proton beam radiotherapy, a treatment modality increasingly used. Since molecular data upon proton irradiation in comparison to standard photon radiotherapy are limited in pancreatic cancer, the aims of our study were to unravel differences in the effectiveness of photon versus proton irradiation and to exploit radiation type-specific molecular changes for radiosensitizing 3D PDAC cell cultures. Although protons showed a slightly higher effectiveness and a stronger induction of molecular alterations than photons, our results revealed a radiation-type independent sensitization of molecular-targeted agents selected according to the discovered molecular, radiation-induced alterations. Abstract Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly therapy-resistant tumor entity of unmet needs. Over the last decades, radiotherapy has been considered as an additional treatment modality to surgery and chemotherapy. Owing to radiosensitive abdominal organs, high-precision proton beam radiotherapy has been regarded as superior to photon radiotherapy. To further elucidate the potential of combination therapies, we employed a more physiological 3D, matrix-based cell culture model to assess tumoroid formation capacity after photon and proton irradiation. Additionally, we investigated proton- and photon-irradiation-induced phosphoproteomic changes for identifying clinically exploitable targets. Here, we show that proton irradiation elicits a higher efficacy to reduce 3D PDAC tumoroid formation and a greater extent of phosphoproteome alterations compared with photon irradiation. The targeting of proteins identified in the phosphoproteome that were uniquely altered by protons or photons failed to cause radiation-type-specific radiosensitization. Targeting DNA repair proteins associated with non-homologous endjoining, however, revealed a strong radiosensitizing potential independent of the radiation type. In conclusion, our findings suggest proton irradiation to be potentially more effective in PDAC than photons without additional efficacy when combined with DNA repair inhibitors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josephine Görte
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany; (J.G.); (E.B.)
- Institute of Radiooncology—OncoRay, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden—Rossendorf, 01328 Dresden, Germany
| | - Elke Beyreuther
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany; (J.G.); (E.B.)
- Institute of Radiation Physics, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden—Rossendorf, 01328 Dresden, Germany
| | - Erik H. J. Danen
- Division of Drug Discovery and Safety, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, 2333CC Leiden, The Netherlands;
| | - Nils Cordes
- OncoRay—National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany; (J.G.); (E.B.)
- Institute of Radiooncology—OncoRay, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden—Rossendorf, 01328 Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium, Partner Site Dresden: German Cancer Research Center, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +49-351-458-7401; Fax: +49-351-458-7311
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Carabe A, Karagounis IV, Huynh K, Bertolet A, François N, Kim MM, Maity A, Abel E, Dale R. Radiobiological effectiveness difference of proton arc beams versus conventional proton and photon beams. Phys Med Biol 2020; 65:165002. [PMID: 32413889 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab9370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
This paper aims to demonstrate the difference in biological effectiveness of proton monoenergetic arc therapy (PMAT) compared to intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and conventional 6 MV photon therapy, and to quantify this difference when exposing cells of different radiosensitivity to the same experimental conditions for each modality. V79, H1299 and H460 cells were cultured in petri dishes placed in the central axis of a cylindrical and homogeneous solid water phantom of 20 cm in diameter. For the PMAT plan, cells were exposed to 13 mono-energetic proton beams separated every 15° over a 180° arc, designed to deliver a uniform dose of higher LET to the petri dishes. For the IMPT plans, 3 fields were used, where each field was modulated to cover the full target. Cells were also exposed to 6 MV photon beams in petri dishes to characterize their radiosensitivity. The relative biological effectiveness of the PMAT plans compared with those of IMPT was measured using clonogenic assays. Similarly, in order to study the quantity and quality of the DNA damage induced by the PMAT plans compared to that of IMPT and photons, γ-H2AX assays were conducted to study the relative amount of DNA damage induced by each modality, and their repair rate over time. The clonogenic assay revealed similar survival levels to the same dose delivered with IMPT or x-rays. However, a systematic average of up to a 43% increase in effectiveness in PMAT plans was observed when compared with IMPT. In addition, the repair kinetic assays proved that PMAT induces larger and more complex DNA damage (evidenced by a slower repair rate and a larger proportion of unrepaired DNA damage) than IMPT. The repair kinetics of IMPT and 6 MV photon therapy were similar. Mono-energetic arc beams offer the possibility of taking advantage of the enhanced LET of proton beams to increase TCP. This study presents initial results based on exposing cells with different radiosensitivity to other modalities under the same experimental conditions, but more extensive clonogenic and in-vivo studies will be required to confirm the validity of these results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alejandro Carabe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, United States of America. Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Xiang K, Jendrossek V, Matschke J. Oncometabolites and the response to radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:197. [PMID: 32799884 PMCID: PMC7429799 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01638-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2020] [Accepted: 08/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) is applied in 45–60% of all cancer patients either alone or in multimodal therapy concepts comprising surgery, RT and chemotherapy. However, despite technical innovations approximately only 50% are cured, highlight a high medical need for innovation in RT practice. RT is a multidisciplinary treatment involving medicine and physics, but has always been successful in integrating emerging novel concepts from cancer and radiation biology for improving therapy outcome. Currently, substantial improvements are expected from integration of precision medicine approaches into RT concepts. Altered metabolism is an important feature of cancer cells and a driving force for malignant progression. Proper metabolic processes are essential to maintain and drive all energy-demanding cellular processes, e.g. repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Consequently, metabolic bottlenecks might allow therapeutic intervention in cancer patients. Increasing evidence now indicates that oncogenic activation of metabolic enzymes, oncogenic activities of mutated metabolic enzymes, or adverse conditions in the tumor microenvironment can result in abnormal production of metabolites promoting cancer progression, e.g. 2-hyroxyglutarate (2-HG), succinate and fumarate, respectively. Interestingly, these so-called “oncometabolites” not only modulate cell signaling but also impact the response of cancer cells to chemotherapy and RT, presumably by epigenetic modulation of DNA repair. Here we aimed to introduce the biological basis of oncometabolite production and of their actions on epigenetic regulation of DNA repair. Furthermore, the review will highlight innovative therapeutic opportunities arising from the interaction of oncometabolites with DNA repair regulation for specifically enhancing the therapeutic effects of genotoxic treatments including RT in cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kexu Xiang
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Virchowstrasse 173, 45147, Essen, Germany
| | - Verena Jendrossek
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Virchowstrasse 173, 45147, Essen, Germany
| | - Johann Matschke
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Virchowstrasse 173, 45147, Essen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Zhang J, Si J, Gan L, Zhou R, Guo M, Zhang H. Harnessing the targeting potential of differential radiobiological effects of photon versus particle radiation for cancer treatment. J Cell Physiol 2020; 236:1695-1711. [PMID: 32691425 DOI: 10.1002/jcp.29960] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2020] [Accepted: 07/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Radiotherapy is one of the major modalities for malignancy treatment. High linear energy transfer (LET) charged-particle beams, like proton and carbon ions, exhibit favourable depth-dose distributions and radiobiological enhancement over conventional low-LET photon irradiation, thereby marking a new era in high precision medicine. Tumour cells have developed multicomponent signal transduction networks known as DNA damage responses (DDRs), which initiate cell-cycle checkpoints and induce double-strand break (DSB) repairs in the nucleus by nonhomologous end joining or homologous recombination pathways, to manage ionising radiation (IR)-induced DNA lesions. DNA damage induction and DSB repair pathways are reportedly dependent on the quality of radiation delivered. In this review, we summarise various types of DNA lesion and DSB repair mechanisms, upon irradiation with low and high-LET radiation, respectively. We also analyse factors influencing DNA repair efficiency. Inhibition of DNA damage repair pathways and dysfunctional cell-cycle checkpoint sensitises tumour cells to IR. Radio-sensitising agents, including DNA-PK inhibitors, Rad51 inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, ATM/ATR inhibitors, chk1 inhibitors, wee1 kinase inhibitors, Hsp90 inhibitors, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors have been found to enhance cell killing by IR through interference with DDRs, cell-cycle arrest, or other cellular processes. The cotreatment of these inhibitors with IR may represent a promising therapeutic strategy for cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jinhua Zhang
- Department of Medical Physics, Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Heavy Ion Radiation Biology and Medicine of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Jing Si
- Department of Medical Physics, Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Heavy Ion Radiation Biology and Medicine of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Lu Gan
- Department of Medical Physics, Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Heavy Ion Radiation Biology and Medicine of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Rong Zhou
- Research Center for Ecological Impacts and Environmental Health Effects of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals, Nanjing Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People's Republic of China, Nanjing, China
| | - Menghuan Guo
- School of Pharmacy, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Hong Zhang
- Department of Medical Physics, Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- Key Laboratory of Heavy Ion Radiation Biology and Medicine of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
- College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Beddok A, Krieger S, Castera L, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Thariat J. Management of Fanconi Anemia patients with head and neck carcinoma: Diagnosis and treatment adaptation. Oral Oncol 2020; 108:104816. [PMID: 32480311 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2020.104816] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2019] [Accepted: 05/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Fanconi anemia (FA) is a rare genetic disease that is mostly transmitted, according to a recessive model with biallelic germline alterations in one of the 22 genes of the FA pathway, or monoallelic alteration of the 23rd FA gene (RAD51). The FA pathway is implicated in interstrand DNA crosslink repair, induces genome stability, and is a potent driver of tumorigenesis. Patients with FA have a 500 to 1000-fold increased risk of developing head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Patients with FA developing an HNSCC, usually have severe radiation toxicities. In this context, the modalities of radiation therapy should be adapted. Some patients with FA present a milder phenotype, especially in the case of medullary FA gene spontaneous reversion. Therefore, in an unusual context of HNSCC, such as no risk factors or a young age, it may be very useful to search anemia or development abnormalities, that may unravel a yet undiagnosed FA disease. Besides, in some young patients with HNSCC who did not suffer from FA, a monoallelic germline alteration in an FA gene could be combined with a second risk factor such as HPV infection or APOBEC alteration. Although several in vitro studies showed that normal cells with monoallelic FA gene alteration may have a particular radiosensitivity, these observations have not been confirmed in vivo in FA heterozygotes patients. Finally, some somatic activating alterations have also been found in HSNCC tumor samples and could be associated with radioresistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnaud Beddok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Curie Institute, Paris, France.
| | - Sophie Krieger
- Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Inserm U1245, Normandy Centre for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, François Baclesse Center, Caen, France
| | - Laurent Castera
- Department of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Inserm U1245, Normandy Centre for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, François Baclesse Center, Caen, France
| | | | - Juliette Thariat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, François Baclesse Center, Caen, France
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Mara E, Clausen M, Khachonkham S, Deycmar S, Pessy C, Dörr W, Kuess P, Georg D, Gruber S. Investigating the impact of alpha/beta and LET d on relative biological effectiveness in scanned proton beams: An in vitro study based on human cell lines. Med Phys 2020; 47:3691-3702. [PMID: 32347564 PMCID: PMC7496287 DOI: 10.1002/mp.14212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2019] [Revised: 04/03/2020] [Accepted: 04/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE A relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 is commonly used in clinical proton therapy, irrespective of tissue type and depth. This in vitro study was conducted to quantify the RBE of scanned protons as a function of the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd ) and the sensitivity factor (α/ß)X . Additionally, three phenomenological models (McNamara, Rørvik, and Jones) and one mechanistic model (repair-misrepair-fixation, RMF) were applied to the experimentally derived data. METHODS Four human cell lines (FaDu, HaCat, Du145, SKMel) with differential (α/ß)X ratios were irradiated in a custom-designed irradiation setup with doses between 0 and 6 Gy at proximal, central, and distal positions of a 80 mm spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) centered at 80 mm (setup A: proton energies 66.5-135.6 MeV) and 155 mm (setup B: proton energies 127.2-185.9 MeV) depth, respectively. LETd values at the respective cell positions were derived from Monte Carlo simulations performed with the treatment planning system (TPS, RayStation). Dosimetric measurements were conducted to verify dose homogeneity and dose delivery accuracy. RBE values were derived for doses that resulted in 90 % (RBE90 ) and 10 % (RBE10 ) of cell survival, and survival after a 0.5 Gy dose (RBE0.5Gy ), 2 Gy dose (RBE2Gy ), and 6 Gy dose (RBE6Gy ). RESULTS LETd values at sample positions were 1.9, 2.1, 2.5, 2.8, 4.1, and 4.5 keV/µm. For the cell lines with high (α/ß)X ratios (FaDu, HaCat), the LETd did not impact on the RBE. For low (α/ß)X cell lines (Du145, SKMel), LQ-derived survival curves indicated a clear correlation of LETd and RBE. RBE90 values up to 2.9 and RBE10 values between 1.4 and 1.8 were obtained. Model-derived RBE predictions slightly overestimated the RBE for the high (α/ß)X cell lines, although all models except the Jones model provided RBE values within the experimental uncertainty. For low (α/ß)X cell lines, no agreement was found between experiments and model predictions, that is, all models underestimated the measured RBE. CONCLUSIONS The sensitivity parameter (α/ß)X was observed to be a major influencing factor for the RBE of protons and its sensitivity toward LETd changes. RBE prediction models are applicable for high (α/ß)X cell lines but do not estimate RBE values with sufficient accuracy in low (α/ß)X cell lines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth Mara
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,University of Applied Science, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Monika Clausen
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Suphalak Khachonkham
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Division of Radiation Therapy, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Simon Deycmar
- Laboratory of Applied Radiobiology, Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Clara Pessy
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Wolfgang Dörr
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Peter Kuess
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,EBG MedAustron GmbH, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Dietmar Georg
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,EBG MedAustron GmbH, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Sylvia Gruber
- Department of Radiation Oncology/Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,EBG MedAustron GmbH, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Choi C, Cho WK, Park S, Shin SW, Park W, Kim H, Choi DH. Checkpoint Kinase 1 (CHK1) Inhibition Enhances the Sensitivity of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Cells to Proton Irradiation via Rad51 Downregulation. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21:ijms21082691. [PMID: 32294924 PMCID: PMC7215565 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21082691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2020] [Revised: 04/11/2020] [Accepted: 04/12/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Due to a superior dose conformity to the target, proton beam therapy (PBT) continues to rise in popularity. Recently, considerable efforts have been directed toward discovering treatment options for use in combination with PBT. This study aimed to investigate the targeting of checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1), a critical player regulating the G2/M checkpoint, as a promising strategy to potentiate PBT in human triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells. Protons induced cell-cycle arrest at the G2/M checkpoint more readily in response to increased CHK1 activation than X-rays. A clonogenic survival assay revealed that CHK1 inhibition using PF-477736 or small interfering RNA (siRNA) enhanced the sensitivity toward protons to a greater extent than toward X-rays. Western blotting demonstrated that PF-477736 treatment in the background of proton irradiation increased the pro-apoptotic signaling, which was further supported by flow cytometry using annexin V. Immunofluorescence revealed that proton-induced DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) were further enhanced by PF-477736, which was linked to the downregulation of Rad51, essential for the homologous recombination repair of DSBs. Direct inactivation of Rad51 resulted in enhanced proton sensitization. Collectively, these data suggest that targeting CHK1 may be a promising approach for improving PBT efficacy in the treatment of TNBC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Changhoon Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
| | - Won Kyung Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
| | - Sohee Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
| | - Sung-Won Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea
| | - Won Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea
| | - Haeyoung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea
| | - Doo Ho Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea; (C.C.); (W.K.C.); (S.P.); (S.-W.S.); (W.P.); (H.K.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +82-2-3410-2436
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Szymonowicz K, Krysztofiak A, van der Linden J, Kern A, Deycmar S, Oeck S, Squire A, Koska B, Hlouschek J, Vüllings M, Neander C, Siveke JT, Matschke J, Pruschy M, Timmermann B, Jendrossek V. Proton Irradiation Increases the Necessity for Homologous Recombination Repair Along with the Indispensability of Non-Homologous End Joining. Cells 2020; 9:E889. [PMID: 32260562 PMCID: PMC7226794 DOI: 10.3390/cells9040889] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2020] [Revised: 03/29/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Technical improvements in clinical radiotherapy for maximizing cytotoxicity to the tumor while limiting negative impact on co-irradiated healthy tissues include the increasing use of particle therapy (e.g., proton therapy) worldwide. Yet potential differences in the biology of DNA damage induction and repair between irradiation with X-ray photons and protons remain elusive. We compared the differences in DNA double strand break (DSB) repair and survival of cells compromised in non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), homologous recombination repair (HRR) or both, after irradiation with an equal dose of X-ray photons, entrance plateau (EP) protons, and mid spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) protons. We used super-resolution microscopy to investigate potential differences in spatial distribution of DNA damage foci upon irradiation. While DNA damage foci were equally distributed throughout the nucleus after X-ray photon irradiation, we observed more clustered DNA damage foci upon proton irradiation. Furthermore, deficiency in essential NHEJ proteins delayed DNA repair kinetics and sensitized cells to both, X-ray photon and proton irradiation, whereas deficiency in HRR proteins sensitized cells only to proton irradiation. We assume that NHEJ is indispensable for processing DNA DSB independent of the irradiation source, whereas the importance of HRR rises with increasing energy of applied irradiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Klaudia Szymonowicz
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
| | - Adam Krysztofiak
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
| | - Jansje van der Linden
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
| | - Ajvar Kern
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (A.K.); (B.K.); (M.V.); (B.T.)
| | - Simon Deycmar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Laboratory for Applied Radiobiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; (S.D.); (M.P.)
| | - Sebastian Oeck
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, USA
| | - Anthony Squire
- Institute of Experimental Immunology and Imaging, Imaging Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, 45122 Essen, Germany;
| | - Benjamin Koska
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (A.K.); (B.K.); (M.V.); (B.T.)
| | - Julian Hlouschek
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
| | - Melanie Vüllings
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (A.K.); (B.K.); (M.V.); (B.T.)
| | - Christian Neander
- Institute of Developmental Cancer Therapeutics, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; (C.N.); (J.T.S.)
- Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK, partner site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens T. Siveke
- Institute of Developmental Cancer Therapeutics, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; (C.N.); (J.T.S.)
- Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK, partner site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Johann Matschke
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
| | - Martin Pruschy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Laboratory for Applied Radiobiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; (S.D.); (M.P.)
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (A.K.); (B.K.); (M.V.); (B.T.)
- Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK, partner site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Particle Therapy, West German Proton Therapy Center Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany
| | - Verena Jendrossek
- Institute of Cell Biology (Cancer Research), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany; (K.S.); (A.K.); (J.v.d.L.); (S.O.); (J.H.); (J.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Perspectives on the model-based approach to proton therapy trials: A retrospective study of a lung cancer randomized trial. Radiother Oncol 2020; 147:8-14. [PMID: 32224318 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.02.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2019] [Revised: 02/25/2020] [Accepted: 02/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The goal of this study was to assess whether a model-based approach applied retrospectively to a completed randomized controlled trial (RCT) would have significantly altered the selection of patients of the original trial, using the same selection criteria and endpoint for testing the potential clinical benefit of protons compared to photons. METHODS AND MATERIALS A model-based approach, based on three widely used normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models for radiation pneumonitis (RP), was applied retrospectively to a completed non-small cell lung cancer RCT (NCT00915005). It was assumed that patients were selected by the model-based approach if their expected ΔNTCP value was above a threshold of 5%. The endpoint chosen matched that of the original trial, the first occurrence of severe (grade ≥3) RP. RESULTS Our analysis demonstrates that NTCP differences between proton and photon therapy treatments may be too small to support a model-based trial approach for lung cancer using RP as the normal tissue endpoint. The analyzed lung trial showed that less than 19% (32/165) of patients enrolled in the completed trial would have been enrolled in a model-based trial, prescribing photon therapy to all other patients. The number of patients enrolled was also found to be dependent on the type of NTCP model used for evaluating RP, with the three models enrolling 3%, 13% or 19% of patients. This result does show limitations in NTCP models which would affect the success of a model-based trial approach. No conclusion regarding the development of RP in patients randomized by the model-based approach could statistically be made. CONCLUSIONS Uncertainties in the outcome models to predict NTCP are the inherent drawback of a model-based approach to clinical trials. The impact of these uncertainties on enrollment in model-based trials depends on the predicted difference between the two treatment arms and on the set threshold for patient stratification. Our analysis demonstrates that NTCP differences between proton and photon therapy treatments may be too small to support a model-based trial approach for specific treatment sites, such as lung cancer, depending on the chosen normal tissue endpoint.
Collapse
|
36
|
Burnet NG, Mackay RI, Smith E, Chadwick AL, Whitfield GA, Thomson DJ, Lowe M, Kirkby NF, Crellin AM, Kirkby KJ. Proton beam therapy: perspectives on the National Health Service England clinical service and research programme. Br J Radiol 2020; 93:20190873. [PMID: 31860337 PMCID: PMC7066938 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2019] [Revised: 12/05/2019] [Accepted: 12/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
The UK has an important role in the evaluation of proton beam therapy (PBT) and takes its place on the world stage with the opening of the first National Health Service (NHS) PBT centre in Manchester in 2018, and the second in London coming in 2020. Systematic evaluation of the role of PBT is a key objective. By September 2019, 108 patients had started treatment, 60 paediatric, 19 teenagers and young adults and 29 adults. Obtaining robust outcome data is vital, if we are to understand the strengths and weaknesses of current treatment approaches. This is important in demonstrating when PBT will provide an advantage and when it will not, and in quantifying the magnitude of benefit.The UK also has an important part to play in translational PBT research, and building a research capability has always been the vision. We are perfectly placed to perform translational pre-clinical biological and physical experiments in the dedicated research room in Manchester. The nature of DNA damage from proton irradiation is considerably different from X-rays and this needs to be more fully explored. A better understanding is needed of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons, especially at the end of the Bragg peak, and of the effects on tumour and normal tissue of PBT combined with conventional chemotherapy, targeted drugs and immunomodulatory agents. These experiments can be enhanced by deterministic mathematical models of the molecular and cellular processes of DNA damage response. The fashion of ultra-high dose rate FLASH irradiation also needs to be explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ed Smith
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, and University of Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| | - Amy L Chadwick
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, and The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| | - Gillian A Whitfield
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, and University of Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| | - David J Thomson
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, and University of Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| | | | - Norman F Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, and The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| | | | - Karen J Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, and The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
McNamara A, Willers H, Paganetti H. Modelling variable proton relative biological effectiveness for treatment planning. Br J Radiol 2019; 93:20190334. [PMID: 31738081 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Dose in proton radiotherapy is generally prescribed by scaling the physical proton dose by a constant value of 1.1. Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) is defined as the ratio of doses required by two radiation modalities to cause the same level of biological effect. The adoption of an RBE of 1.1. assumes that the biological efficacy of protons is similar to photons, allowing decades of clinical dose prescriptions from photon treatments and protocols to be utilized in proton therapy. There is, however, emerging experimental evidence that indicates that proton RBE varies based on technical, tissue and patient factors. The notion that a single scaling factor may be used to equate the effects of photons and protons across all biological endpoints and doses is too simplistic and raises concern for treatment planning decisions. Here, we review the models that have been developed to better predict RBE variations in tissue based on experimental data as well as using a mechanistic approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aimee McNamara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
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
|
39
|
Choi C, Park S, Cho WK, Choi DH. Cyclin D1 is Associated with Radiosensitivity of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Cells to Proton Beam Irradiation. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20:ijms20194943. [PMID: 31591311 PMCID: PMC6801441 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20194943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2019] [Revised: 10/04/2019] [Accepted: 10/05/2019] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy offers a distinct physical advantage over conventional X-ray therapy, but its biological advantages remain understudied. In this study, we aimed to identify genetic factors that contribute to proton sensitivity in breast cancer (BC). Therefore, we screened relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 230 MeV protons, compared to 6 MV X-rays, in ten human BC cell lines, including five triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cell lines. Clonogenic survival assays revealed a wide range of proton RBE across the BC cell lines, with one out of ten BC cell lines having an RBE significantly different from the traditional generic RBE of 1.1. An abundance of cyclin D1 was associated with proton RBE. Downregulation of RB1 by siRNA or a CDK4/6 inhibitor increased proton sensitivity but not proton RBE. Instead, the depletion of cyclin D1 increased proton RBE in two TNBC cell lines, including MDA-MB-231 and Hs578T cells. Conversely, overexpression of cyclin D1 decreased the proton RBE in cyclin D1-deficient BT-549 cells. The depletion of cyclin D1 impaired proton-induced RAD51 foci formation in MDA-MB-231 cells. Taken together, this study provides important clues about the cyclin D1-CDK4-RB1 pathway as a potential target for proton beam therapy in TNBC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Changhoon Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea.
| | - Sohee Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea.
| | - Won Kyung Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea.
| | - Doo Ho Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul 06351, Korea.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Bright SJ, Flint DB, Chakraborty S, McFadden CH, Yoon DS, Bronk L, Titt U, Mohan R, Grosshans DR, Sumazin P, Shaitelman SF, Asaithamby A, Sawakuchi GO. Nonhomologous End Joining Is More Important Than Proton Linear Energy Transfer in Dictating Cell Death. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 105:1119-1125. [PMID: 31425731 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2019] [Revised: 08/03/2019] [Accepted: 08/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study seeks to identify biological factors that may yield a therapeutic advantage of proton therapy versus photon therapy. Specifically, we address the role of nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) in the survival of cells in response to clinical photon and proton beams. METHODS AND MATERIALS We irradiated HT1080, M059K (DNA-PKcs+/+), and HCC1937 human cancer cell lines and their isogenic counterparts HT1080-shDNA-PKcs, HT1080-shRAD51IND, M059J (DNA-PKcs-/-), and HCC1937-BRCA1 (BRCA1 complemented) to assess cell clonogenic survival and γ-H2AX radiation-induced foci. Cells were irradiated with either clinically relevant photons or 1 of 3 proton linear energy transfer (LET) values. RESULTS Our results indicate that NHEJ deficiency is more important in dictating cell survival than proton LET. Cells with disrupted HR through BRCA1 mutation showed increased radiosensitivity only for high-LET protons whereas RAD51 depletion showed increased radiosensitivity for both photons and protons. DNA double strand breaks, assessed by γ-H2AX radiation-induced foci, showed greater numbers after 24 hours in cells exposed to higher LET protons. We also observed that NHEJ-deficient cells were unable to repair the vast majority of double strand breaks after 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS BRCA1 mutation significantly sensitizes cells to protons, but not photons. Loss of NHEJ renders cells hypersensitive to radiation, whereas the relative importance of HR increases with LET across several cell lines. This may be attributable to the more clustered damage induced by higher LET protons, which are harder to repair through NHEJ. This highlights the importance of tumor biology in dictating treatment modality and suggests BRCA1 as a potential biomarker for proton therapy response. Our data also support the use of pharmacologic inhibitors of DNA repair to enhance the sensitivity to different radiation types, although this raises issues for normal tissue toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Scott J Bright
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - David B Flint
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sharmistha Chakraborty
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Conor H McFadden
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - David S Yoon
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Lawrence Bronk
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Uwe Titt
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - David R Grosshans
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Pavel Sumazin
- Texas Children's Cancer Center and Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Simona F Shaitelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Aroumougame Asaithamby
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Gabriel O Sawakuchi
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Vitti ET, Parsons JL. The Radiobiological Effects of Proton Beam Therapy: Impact on DNA Damage and Repair. Cancers (Basel) 2019; 11:cancers11070946. [PMID: 31284432 PMCID: PMC6679138 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11070946] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2019] [Revised: 06/11/2019] [Accepted: 07/02/2019] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Proton beam therapy (PBT) offers significant benefit over conventional (photon) radiotherapy for the treatment of a number of different human cancers, largely due to the physical characteristics. In particular, the low entrance dose and maximum energy deposition in depth at a well-defined region, the Bragg peak, can spare irradiation of proximal healthy tissues and organs at risk when compared to conventional radiotherapy using high-energy photons. However, there are still biological uncertainties reflected in the relative biological effectiveness that varies along the track of the proton beam as a consequence of the increases in linear energy transfer (LET). Furthermore, the spectrum of DNA damage induced by protons, particularly the generation of complex DNA damage (CDD) at high-LET regions of the distal edge of the Bragg peak, and the specific DNA repair pathways dependent on their repair are not entirely understood. This knowledge is essential in understanding the biological impact of protons on tumor cells, and ultimately in devising optimal therapeutic strategies employing PBT for greater clinical impact and patient benefit. Here, we provide an up-to-date review on the radiobiological effects of PBT versus photon radiotherapy in cells, particularly in the context of DNA damage. We also review the DNA repair pathways that are essential in the cellular response to PBT, with a specific focus on the signaling and processing of CDD induced by high-LET protons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eirini Terpsi Vitti
- Cancer Research Centre, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L3 9TA, UK
| | - Jason L Parsons
- Cancer Research Centre, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L3 9TA, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Choi C, Son A, Lee GH, Shin SW, Park S, Ahn SH, Chung Y, Yu JI, Park HC. Targeting DNA-dependent protein kinase sensitizes hepatocellular carcinoma cells to proton beam irradiation through apoptosis induction. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0218049. [PMID: 31194786 PMCID: PMC6563991 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2019] [Accepted: 05/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Recent studies have highlighted the implications of genetic variations in the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of proton beam irradiation over conventional X-ray irradiation. Proton beam radiotherapy is a reasonable radiotherapy option for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the impact of genetic difference on the HCC RBE remains unknown. Here, we determined proton RBE in human HCC cells by exposing them to various doses of either 6-MV X-rays or 230-MeV proton beams. Clonogenic survival assay revealed variable radiosensitivity of human HCC cell lines with survival fraction at 2 Gy ranging from 0.38 to 0.83 and variable proton RBEs with 37% survival fraction ranging from 1.00 to 1.48. HCC cells appeared more sensitive to proton irradiation than X-rays, with more persistent activation of DNA damage repair proteins over time. Depletion of a DNA damage repair gene, DNA-PKcs, by siRNA dramatically increased the sensitivity of HCC cells to proton beams with a decrease in colony survival and an increase in apoptosis. Our findings suggest that there are large variations in proton RBE in HCC cells despite the use of a constant RBE of 1.1 in the clinic and targeting DNA-PKcs in combination with proton beam therapy may be a promising regimen for treating HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Changhoon Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Arang Son
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ga-Haeng Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sung-Won Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
- Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sohee Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sang Hee Ahn
- Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Yoonsun Chung
- Department of Nuclear Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jeong Il Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Hee Chul Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
- Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Mechanistic modelling supports entwined rather than exclusively competitive DNA double-strand break repair pathway. Sci Rep 2019; 9:6359. [PMID: 31015540 PMCID: PMC6478946 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-42901-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2019] [Accepted: 04/04/2019] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Following radiation induced DNA damage, several repair pathways are activated to help preserve genome integrity. Double Strand Breaks (DSBs), which are highly toxic, have specified repair pathways to address them. The main repair pathways used to resolve DSBs are Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ) and Homologous Recombination (HR). Cell cycle phase determines the availability of HR, but the repair choice between pathways in the G2 phases where both HR and NHEJ can operate is not clearly understood. This study compares several in silico models of repair choice to experimental data published in the literature, each model representing a different possible scenario describing how repair choice takes place. Competitive only scenarios, where initial protein recruitment determines repair choice, are unable to fit the literature data. In contrast, the scenario which uses a more entwined relationship between NHEJ and HR, incorporating protein co-localisation and RNF138-dependent removal of the Ku/DNA-PK complex, is better able to predict levels of repair similar to the experimental data. Furthermore, this study concludes that co-localisation of the Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN) complexes, with initial NHEJ proteins must be modeled to accurately depict repair choice.
Collapse
|
44
|
Paganetti H, Blakely E, Carabe-Fernandez A, Carlson DJ, Das IJ, Dong L, Grosshans D, Held KD, Mohan R, Moiseenko V, Niemierko A, Stewart RD, Willers H. Report of the AAPM TG-256 on the relative biological effectiveness of proton beams in radiation therapy. Med Phys 2019; 46:e53-e78. [PMID: 30661238 DOI: 10.1002/mp.13390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 181] [Impact Index Per Article: 36.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2018] [Revised: 11/21/2018] [Accepted: 01/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
The biological effectiveness of proton beams relative to photon beams in radiation therapy has been taken to be 1.1 throughout the history of proton therapy. While potentially appropriate as an average value, actual relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values may differ. This Task Group report outlines the basic concepts of RBE as well as the biophysical interpretation and mathematical concepts. The current knowledge on RBE variations is reviewed and discussed in the context of the current clinical use of RBE and the clinical relevance of RBE variations (with respect to physical as well as biological parameters). The following task group aims were designed to guide the current clinical practice: Assess whether the current clinical practice of using a constant RBE for protons should be revised or maintained. Identifying sites and treatment strategies where variable RBE might be utilized for a clinical benefit. Assess the potential clinical consequences of delivering biologically weighted proton doses based on variable RBE and/or LET models implemented in treatment planning systems. Recommend experiments needed to improve our current understanding of the relationships among in vitro, in vivo, and clinical RBE, and the research required to develop models. Develop recommendations to minimize the effects of uncertainties associated with proton RBE for well-defined tumor types and critical structures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Eleanor Blakely
- Biological Systems and Engineering Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
| | | | - David J Carlson
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Indra J Das
- New York University Langone Medical Center & Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Lei Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - David Grosshans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kathryn D Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Vitali Moiseenko
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Andrzej Niemierko
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Robert D Stewart
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Henning Willers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Elming PB, Sørensen BS, Oei AL, Franken NAP, Crezee J, Overgaard J, Horsman MR. Hyperthermia: The Optimal Treatment to Overcome Radiation Resistant Hypoxia. Cancers (Basel) 2019; 11:E60. [PMID: 30634444 PMCID: PMC6356970 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11010060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 119] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2018] [Revised: 12/14/2018] [Accepted: 12/29/2018] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Regions of low oxygenation (hypoxia) are a characteristic feature of solid tumors, and cells existing in these regions are a major factor influencing radiation resistance as well as playing a significant role in malignant progression. Consequently, numerous pre-clinical and clinical attempts have been made to try and overcome this hypoxia. These approaches involve improving oxygen availability, radio-sensitizing or killing the hypoxic cells, or utilizing high LET (linear energy transfer) radiation leading to a lower OER (oxygen enhancement ratio). Interestingly, hyperthermia (heat treatments of 39⁻45 °C) induces many of these effects. Specifically, it increases blood flow thereby improving tissue oxygenation, radio-sensitizes via DNA repair inhibition, and can kill cells either directly or indirectly by causing vascular damage. Combining hyperthermia with low LET radiation can even result in anti-tumor effects equivalent to those seen with high LET. The various mechanisms depend on the time and sequence between radiation and hyperthermia, the heating temperature, and the time of heating. We will discuss the role these factors play in influencing the interaction between hyperthermia and radiation, and summarize the randomized clinical trials showing a benefit of such a combination as well as suggest the potential future clinical application of this combination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pernille B Elming
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
| | - Brita S Sørensen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
| | - Arlene L Oei
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, 1105AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nicolaas A P Franken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, 1105AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Johannes Crezee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, 1105AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jens Overgaard
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
| | - Michael R Horsman
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
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
|
47
|
Story MD, Wang J. Developing Predictive or Prognostic Biomarkers for Charged Particle Radiotherapy. Int J Part Ther 2018; 5:94-102. [PMID: 30393751 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-18-00027.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
The response to radiotherapy can vary greatly among individuals, even though advances in technology allow for the highly localized placement of therapeutic doses of radiation to a tumor. This variability in patient response to radiation is biologically driven, but the individuality of tumor and healthy tissue biology are not used to create individual treatment plans. Biomarkers of radiosensitivity, whether intrinsic or from hypoxia, would move radiation oncology from precision medicine to precise, personalized medicine. Charged particle radiotherapy allows for even greater dose conformity, but the biological advantages of charged particle radiotherapy have not yet been cultivated. The development of biomarkers that would drive biologically based clinical trials, identify patients for whom charged particles are most appropriate, or aid in particle-selection strategies could be envisioned with appropriate biomarkers. Initially, biomarkers for low-linear energy transfer (LET) radiation responses should be tested against charged particles. Biomarkers of tumor radioresistance to low-LET radiations could be used to identify patients for whom the enhanced relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of charged particles would be more effective compared with low-LET radiations and those for whom specific DNA-repair inhibitors, in combination with charged particles, may also be appropriate. Furthermore, heavy charged particles can overcome the radioresistance of hypoxic tumors when used at the appropriate LET. Biomarkers for hypoxia could identify hypoxic tumors and, in combination with imaging, define hypoxic regions of a tumor for specific ion selection. Moreover, because of the enhanced RBE for charged particles, the risk for adverse healthy tissue effects may be greater, even though charged particles have greater tumor conformality. There are many validated healthy-tissue biomarkers available to test against charged particle exposures. Lastly, newer biological techniques, as well as newer bioinformatic and computational methods, are rapidly changing the landscape for biomarker identification, validation, and clinical trial design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael D Story
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Jing Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Sertorio M, Perentesis JP, Vatner RE, Mascia AE, Zheng Y, Wells SI. Cancer Cell Metabolism: Implications for X-ray and Particle Radiation Therapy. Int J Part Ther 2018; 5:40-48. [PMID: 31773019 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-18-00023.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2018] [Accepted: 06/21/2018] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Advances in radiation delivery technologies and immunotherapy have improved effective cancer treatments and long-term outcomes. Experimental and clinical trials have demonstrated the benefit of a combination of radiation therapy and immunotherapy for tumor eradication. Despite precise radiation dose delivery that is achievable by particle therapy and benefits from reactivating the antitumor immune response, resistance to both therapeutic strategies is frequently observed in patients. Understanding the biological origins of such resistance will create new opportunities for improved cancer treatment. Cancer metabolism and especially a high rate of aerobic glycolysis leading to overproduction and release of lactate is one such biological process favoring tumor progression and treatment resistance. Because of their known protumor effects, aerobic glycolysis and lactate production are potential targets for increased efficacy of radiation alone or in combination with immunotherapy. In the following review, we present an overview of the interplay of cancer cell lactate metabolism with the tumor microenvironment and immune cells. We discuss how a deeper understanding and careful modulation of lactate metabolism and radiation therapy might exploit this interplay for improved therapeutic outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mathieu Sertorio
- Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - John P Perentesis
- Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Ralph E Vatner
- Division of Immunobiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, OH, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Anthony E Mascia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Yi Zheng
- Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Susanne I Wells
- Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Morton LM, Ricks-Santi L, West CML, Rosenstein BS. Radiogenomic Predictors of Adverse Effects following Charged Particle Therapy. Int J Part Ther 2018; 5:103-113. [PMID: 30505881 PMCID: PMC6261418 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-18-00009.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2018] [Accepted: 06/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiogenomics is the study of genomic factors that are associated with response to radiation therapy. In recent years, progress has been made toward identifying genetic risk factors linked with late radiation-induced adverse effects. These advances have been underpinned by the establishment of an international Radiogenomics Consortium with collaborative studies that expand cohort sizes to increase statistical power and efforts to improve methodologic approaches for radiogenomic research. Published studies have predominantly reported the results of research involving patients treated with photons using external beam radiation therapy. These studies demonstrate our ability to pool international cohorts to identify common single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with risk for developing normal tissue toxicities. Progress has also been achieved toward the discovery of genetic variants associated with radiation therapy-related subsequent malignancies. With the increasing use of charged particle therapy (CPT), there is a need to establish cohorts for patients treated with these advanced technology forms of radiation therapy and to create biorepositories with linked clinical data. While some genetic variants are likely to impact toxicity and second malignancy risks for both photons and charged particles, it is plausible that others may be specific to the radiation modality due to differences in their biological effects, including the complexity of DNA damage produced. In recognition that the formation of patient cohorts treated with CPT for radiogenomic studies is a high priority, efforts are underway to establish collaborations involving institutions treating cancer patients with protons and/or carbon ions as well as consortia, including the Proton Collaborative Group, the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group, and the Pediatric Proton Consortium Registry. These important radiogenomic CPT initiatives need to be expanded internationally to build on experience gained from the Radiogenomics Consortium and epidemiologists investigating normal tissue toxicities and second cancer risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay M. Morton
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | | | - Catharine M. L. West
- Division of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Barry S. Rosenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Department of Genetics & Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Paganetti H. Proton Relative Biological Effectiveness - Uncertainties and Opportunities. Int J Part Ther 2018; 5:2-14. [PMID: 30370315 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-18-00011.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy treatments are prescribed using a biological effectiveness relative to photon therapy of 1.1, that is, proton beams are considered to be 10% more biologically effective. Debate is ongoing as to whether this practice needs to be revised. This short review summarizes current knowledge on relative biological effectiveness variations and uncertainties in vitro and in vivo. Clinical relevance is discussed and strategies toward biologically guided treatment planning are presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|