1
|
Ödén J, Eriksson K, Kaushik S, Traneus E. Beyond a constant proton relative biological effectiveness: A survey of clinical and research perspectives among proton institutions in Europe and the United States. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2024:e14535. [PMID: 39492602 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14535] [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: 07/01/2024] [Revised: 08/15/2024] [Accepted: 08/26/2024] [Indexed: 11/05/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Although proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE) depends on factors like linear energy transfer (LET), tissue properties, dose, and biological endpoint, a constant RBE of 1.1 is recommended in clinical practice. This study surveys proton institutions to explore activities using functionalities beyond a constant proton RBE. METHODS Research versions of RayStation integrate functionalities considering variable proton RBE, LET, proton track-ends, and dirty dose. A survey of 19 institutions in Europe and the United States, with these functionalities available, investigated clinical adoption and research prospects using a 25-question online questionnaire. RESULTS Of the 16 institutions that responded (84% response rate), 13 were clinically active. These clinical institutions prescribe RBE = 1.1 but also employ planning strategies centered around special beam arrangements to address potentially enhanced RBE effects in serially structured organs at risk (OARs). Clinical plan evaluation encompassed beam angles/spot position (69%), dose-averaged LET (LETd) (46%), and variable RBE distributions (38%). High ratings (discrete scale: 1-5) were reported for the research functionalities using linear LETd-RBE models, LETd, track-end frequency and dirty dose (averages: 4.0-4.8), while LQ-based phenomenological RBE models dependent on LETd scored lower for optimization (average: 2.2) but congruent for evaluation (average: 4.1). The institutions preferred LET reported as LETd (94%), computed in unit-density water (56%), for all protons (63%), and lean toward LETd-based phenomenological RBE models for clinical use (> 50%). CONCLUSIONS Proton institutions recognize RBE variability but adhere to a constant RBE while actively mitigating potential enhancements, particularly in serially structured OARs. Research efforts focus on planning techniques that utilize functionalities beyond a constant RBE, emphasizing standardized LET and RBE calculations to facilitate their adoption in clinical practice and improve clinical data collection. LETd calculated in unit-density water for all protons as input to adaptable phenomenological RBE models was the most suggested approach, aligning with predominant clinical LET and variable RBE reporting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jakob Ödén
- Department of Research, RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Kjell Eriksson
- Department of Research, RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Suryakant Kaushik
- Department of Research, RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Erik Traneus
- Department of Research, RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Palkowitsch M, Kaufmann LM, Hennings F, Menkel S, Hahn C, Bensberg J, Lühr A, Seidlitz A, Troost EGC, Krause M, Löck S. Variable-RBE-induced NTCP predictions for various side-effects following proton therapy for brain tumors - Identification of high-risk patients and risk mitigation. Radiother Oncol 2024; 202:110590. [PMID: 39427934 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2024] [Revised: 10/14/2024] [Accepted: 10/14/2024] [Indexed: 10/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Disregarding the increase of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) may raise the risk of acute and late adverse events after proton beam therapy (PBT). This study aims to explore the relationship between variable RBE (above 1.1)-induced normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) and patient-specific factors, identify patients at high risk of RBE-induced NTCP increase, and assess risk mitigation by incorporating RBE variability into treatment planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 105 primary brain tumor patients treated with PBT (RBE = 1.1). We calculated differences in estimated NTCP (ΔNTCP) using a variable RBE-weighted dose (DRBE, Wedenberg model) and a constant RBE-weighted dose (DRBE=1.1), across 16 NTCP models. These differences were correlated with patient-specific characteristics. Based on ΔNTCP, patients were classified as high risk (32 %) or low risk (68 %) for adverse events due to RBE-induced NTCP. This classification was compared with alternative classifications based on (a) relevant patient-specific characteristics, (b) DRBE=1.1, and (c) the difference between DRBE and DRBE=1.1 (ΔD), assessing the balanced accuracy. The potential to reduce RBE-induced NTCP through track-end and linear energy transfer (LET) optimization was evaluated in six example patients. RESULTS Using a variable RBE instead of a constant one resulted in NTCP increases (up to 32 percentage points). Variable-RBE-induced NTCP increases were strongly negatively correlated with the distance between the clinical target volume (CTV) and the organ at risk (OAR) for most side-effects, and positively correlated with CTV volume for certain side-effects. High increases were associated with (a) specific patient factors, particularly the proximity of the CTV to OARs, (b) DRBE=1.1, and (c) ΔD, with a balanced accuracy of 0.88, 0.94, and 0.86, respectively. Optimization of track-ends and LET considerably reduced NTCP values, achieving a mean reduction of 31 % for optimized OARs. CONCLUSION The risk of variable-RBE-induced NTCP strongly depends on patient-specific factors and the considered side-effect. A small distance between the tumor and OARs notably increases the risk. Integrating biologically-guided objectives into treatment planning can effectively mitigate the risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Palkowitsch
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany.
| | - Lisa-Marie Kaufmann
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Fabian Hennings
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stefan Menkel
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Hahn
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Jona Bensberg
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany; TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Annekatrin Seidlitz
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NCT/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NCT/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NCT/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sallem H, Harrabi S, Traneus E, Herfarth K, Debus J, Bauer J. A model-based risk-minimizing proton treatment planning concept for brain injury prevention in low-grade glioma patients. Radiother Oncol 2024; 201:110579. [PMID: 39393467 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110579] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2024] [Revised: 09/24/2024] [Accepted: 09/27/2024] [Indexed: 10/13/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Late-occurring contrast-enhancing brain lesions (CEBLs) have been observed on MRI follow-up in low-grade glioma (LGG) patients post-proton therapy. Predictive risk-models for this endpoint identified a dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd)-dependent proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE) effect on CEBL occurrence and increased radiosensitivity of the cerebral periventricular region (VP4mm). This work aimed to design a stable risk-minimizing treatment planning (TP) concept addressing these intertwined risk factors through a classically formulated optimization problem. MATERIAL AND METHODS The concept was developed in RayStation-research 11B IonPG featuring a variable-RBE-based optimizer involving 20 LGG patients with varying target volume localizations and risk-factor contributions. Classical cost functions penalizing dose, dose-volume-histogram points, and equivalent uniform dose were used to formulate the optimization problem, and a new set of structures was introduced to actively spare the VP4mm, control high LETd regions, and de-escalate the dose outside the gross tumor volume. Target volume coverage and organ-at-risk sparing were robustly evaluated, and Normal Tissue Complication Probabilities (NTCP) for CEBL occurrence were quantified. RESULTS The concept yielded stable optimization outcomes for all considered subjects. Risk hot spots were successfully mitigated, and an NTCP reduction of up to 79 % was observed compared to conventional TP while maintaining target coverage, demonstrating the feasibility of the chosen model-based approach. CONCLUSION With the proposed TP protocol, we close the gap between predictive risk-modeling and practical risk-mitigation in the clinic and provide a concept for CEBL avoidance with the potential to advance treatment precision for LGG patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Sallem
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - S Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - E Traneus
- RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - K Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J Bauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Chamseddine I, Shah K, Lee H, Ehret F, Schuemann J, Bertolet A, Shih HA, Paganetti H. Decoding Patient Heterogeneity Influencing Radiation-Induced Brain Necrosis. Clin Cancer Res 2024; 30:4424-4433. [PMID: 39106090 PMCID: PMC11444871 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-24-1215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2024] [Revised: 06/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/02/2024] [Indexed: 08/07/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE In radiotherapy (RT) for brain tumors, patient heterogeneity masks treatment effects, complicating the prediction and mitigation of radiation-induced brain necrosis. Therefore, understanding this heterogeneity is essential for improving outcome assessments and reducing toxicity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN We developed a clinically practical pipeline to clarify the relationship between dosimetric features and outcomes by identifying key variables. We processed data from a cohort of 130 patients treated with proton therapy for brain and head and neck tumors, utilizing an expert-augmented Bayesian network to understand variable interdependencies and assess structural dependencies. Critical evaluation involved a three-level grading system for each network connection and a Markov blanket analysis to identify variables directly impacting necrosis risk. Statistical assessments included log-likelihood ratio, integrated discrimination index, net reclassification index, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC). RESULTS The analysis highlighted tumor location and proximity to critical structures such as white matter and ventricles as major determinants of necrosis risk. The majority of network connections were clinically supported, with quantitative measures confirming the significance of these variables in patient stratification (log-likelihood ratio = 12.17; P = 0.016; integrated discrimination index = 0.15; net reclassification index = 0.74). The ROC curve area was 0.66, emphasizing the discriminative value of nondosimetric variables. CONCLUSIONS Key patient variables critical to understanding brain necrosis post-RT were identified, aiding the study of dosimetric impacts and providing treatment confounders and moderators. This pipeline aims to enhance outcome assessments by revealing at-risk patients, offering a versatile tool for broader applications in RT to improve treatment personalization in different disease sites.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ibrahim Chamseddine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Keyur Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Hoyeon Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Felix Ehret
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of Radiation Oncology, Berlin, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Berlin, a partnership between DKFZ and Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Jan Schuemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alejandro Bertolet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Helen A Shih
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Parisi A, Furutani KM, Sato T, Beltran CJ. LET-based approximation of the microdosimetric kinetic model for proton radiotherapy. Med Phys 2024; 51:7589-7605. [PMID: 39153222 DOI: 10.1002/mp.17337] [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: 04/26/2024] [Revised: 07/19/2024] [Accepted: 07/19/2024] [Indexed: 08/19/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Phenomenological relative biological effectiveness (RBE) models for proton therapy, based on the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LET), have been developed to address the apparent RBE increase towards the end of the proton range. The results of these phenomenological models substantially differ due to varying empirical assumptions and fitting functions. In contrast, more theory-based approaches are used in carbon ion radiotherapy, such as the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM). However, implementing microdosimetry-based models in LET-based proton therapy treatment planning systems poses challenges. PURPOSE This work presents a LET-based version of the MKM that is practical for clinical use in proton radiotherapy. METHODS At first, we derived an approximation of the Mayo Clinic Florida (MCF) MKM for relatively-sparsely ionizing radiation such as protons. The mathematical formalism of the proposed model is equivalent to the original MKM, but it maintains some key features of the MCF MKM, such as the determination of model parameters from measurable cell characteristics. Subsequently, we carried out Monte Carlo calculations with PHITS in different simulated scenarios to establish a heuristic correlation between microdosimetric quantities and the dose averaged LET of protons. RESULTS A simple allometric function was found able to describe the relationship between the dose-averaged LET of protons and the dose-mean lineal energy, which includes the contributions of secondary particles. The LET-based MKM was used to model the in vitro clonogenic survival RBE of five human and rodent cell lines (A549, AG01522, CHO, T98G, and U87) exposed to pristine and spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) proton beams. The results of the LET-based MKM agree well with the biological data in a comparable or better way with respect to the other models included in the study. A sensitivity analysis on the model results was also performed. CONCLUSIONS The LET-based MKM integrates the predictive theoretical framework of the MCF MKM with a straightforward mathematical description of the RBE based on the dose-averaged LET, a physical quantity readily available in modern treatment planning systems for proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessio Parisi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Keith M Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Tatsuhiko Sato
- Nuclear Science and Engineering Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Tokai, Ibaraki, Japan
- Research Center for Nuclear Physics, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka, Japan
| | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Juvkam IS, Zlygosteva O, Sitarz M, Sørensen BS, Aass HCD, Edin NJ, Galtung HK, Søland TM, Malinen E. Proton- compared to X-irradiation leads to more acinar atrophy and greater hyposalivation accompanied by a differential cytokine response. Sci Rep 2024; 14:22311. [PMID: 39333378 PMCID: PMC11437014 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-73110-7] [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: 03/20/2024] [Accepted: 09/13/2024] [Indexed: 09/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy gives less dose to healthy tissue compared to conventional X-ray therapy, but systematic comparisons of normal tissue responses are lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate late tissue responses in the salivary glands following proton- or X-irradiation of the head and neck in mice. Moreover, we aimed at investigating molecular responses by monitoring the cytokine levels in serum and saliva. Female C57BL/6J mice underwent local fractionated irradiation with protons or X-rays to the maximally tolerated acute level. Saliva and serum were collected before and at different time points after irradiation to assess salivary gland function and cytokine expression. To study late responses in the major salivary glands, histological analyses were performed on tissues collected at day 105 after onset of irradiation. Saliva volume after proton and X-irradiation was significantly lower than for controls and remained reduced at all time points after irradiation. Protons caused reduced saliva production and fewer acinar cells in the submandibular glands compared to X-rays at day 105. X-rays induced a stronger inflammatory cytokine response in saliva compared to protons. This work supports previous preclinical findings and indicate that the relative biological effectiveness of protons in normal tissue might be higher than the commonly used value of 1.1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Inga Solgård Juvkam
- Institute of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Radiation Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Olga Zlygosteva
- Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mateusz Sitarz
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Brita Singers Sørensen
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Hans Christian D Aass
- The Blood Cell Research Group, Department of Medical Biochemistry, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Nina Jeppesen Edin
- Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Hilde Kanli Galtung
- Institute of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Tine Merete Søland
- Institute of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Eirik Malinen
- Department of Radiation Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
- Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhu Z, Gong G, Wang L, Su Y, Lu J, Dong G, Yin Y. Dose-Painting Proton Radiotherapy Guided by Functional MRI in Non-enhancing High-Grade Gliomas. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2024; 36:552-561. [PMID: 38876805 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2024.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Revised: 05/17/2024] [Accepted: 05/23/2024] [Indexed: 06/16/2024]
Abstract
AIMS This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility and evaluate the dosimetric effect and clinical impact of dose-painting proton radiotherapy (PRT) guided by functional MRI in non-enhancing high-grade gliomas (NE-HGGs). MATERIALS AND METHODS The 3D-ASL and T2 FLAIR MR images of ten patients with NE-HGGs before radiotherapy were studied retrospectively. The hyperintensity on T2 FLAIR was used to generate the planning target volume (PTV), and the high-perfusion volume on 3D-ASL (PTV-ASL) was used to generate the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) volume. Each patient received pencil beam scanning PRT and photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). There were five plans in each modality: (1) Uniform plans (IMRT60 vs. PRT60): 60Gy in 30 fractions to the PTV. (2)-(5) SIB plans (IMRT72, 84, 96, 108 vs. PRT72, 84, 96, 108): Uniform plan plus additional dose boost to PTV-ASL in 30 fractions to 72, 84, 96, 108 Gy. The dosimetric differences between various plans were compared. The clinical effects of target volume and organs at risk (OARs) were assessed using biological models for both tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). RESULTS Compared with the IMRT plan, the D2 and D50 of the PRT plans with the same prescription dose increased by 1.27-4.12% and 0.64-2.01%, respectively; the R30 decreased by > 32%; the dose of brainstem and chiasma decreased by > 27% and >32%; and the dose of normal brain tissue (Br-PTV), optic nerves, eyeballs, lens, cochlea, spinal cord, and hippocampus decreased by > 50% (P < 0.05). The maximum necessary dose was 96GyE to achieve >98% TCP for PRT, and it was 84Gy to achieve >91% TCP for IMRT. The average NTCP of Br-PTV was 1.30% and 1.90% for PRT and IMRT at the maximum dose escalation, respectively. The NTCP values of the remaining OARs approached zero in all PRT plans. CONCLUSION The functional MRI-guided dose escalation using PRT is feasible while sparing the OARs constraints and demonstrates a potential clinical benefit by improving TCP with no or minimal increase in NCTP for tissues outside the PTV. This retrospective study suggested that the use of PRT-based SIB guided by functional MRI may represent a strategy to provide benefits for patients with NE-HGGs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Z Zhu
- Harbin Medical University, No.157, Baojian Road, Nangang District, Harbin City, 150081, Heilongjiang Province, China; Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, No.440 Jiyan Road, Huaiyin District, Jinan City, 250117, Shandong Province, China
| | - G Gong
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, No.440 Jiyan Road, Huaiyin District, Jinan City, 250117, Shandong Province, China
| | - L Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, No.440 Jiyan Road, Huaiyin District, Jinan City, 250117, Shandong Province, China
| | - Y Su
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, No.440 Jiyan Road, Huaiyin District, Jinan City, 250117, Shandong Province, China
| | - J Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, No.440 Jiyan Road, Huaiyin District, Jinan City, 250117, Shandong Province, China
| | - G Dong
- Harbin Medical University, No.157, Baojian Road, Nangang District, Harbin City, 150081, Heilongjiang Province, China.
| | - Y Yin
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, No.440 Jiyan Road, Huaiyin District, Jinan City, 250117, Shandong Province, China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Starke S, Kieslich A, Palkowitsch M, Hennings F, G C Troost E, Krause M, Bensberg J, Hahn C, Heinzelmann F, Bäumer C, Lühr A, Timmermann B, Löck S. A deep-learning-based surrogate model for Monte-Carlo simulations of the linear energy transfer in primary brain tumor patients treated with proton-beam radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:165034. [PMID: 39019053 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad64b7] [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: 04/25/2024] [Accepted: 07/17/2024] [Indexed: 07/19/2024]
Abstract
Objective.This study explores the use of neural networks (NNs) as surrogate models for Monte-Carlo (MC) simulations in predicting the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) of protons in proton-beam therapy based on the planned dose distribution and patient anatomy in the form of computed tomography (CT) images. As LETdis associated with variability in the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons, we also evaluate the implications of using NN predictions for normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models within a variable-RBE context.Approach.The predictive performance of three-dimensional NN architectures was evaluated using five-fold cross-validation on a cohort of brain tumor patients (n= 151). The best-performing model was identified and externally validated on patients from a different center (n= 107). LETdpredictions were compared to MC-simulated results in clinically relevant regions of interest. We assessed the impact on NTCP models by leveraging LETdpredictions to derive RBE-weighted doses, using the Wedenberg RBE model.Main results.We found NNs based solely on the planned dose distribution, i.e. without additional usage of CT images, can approximate MC-based LETddistributions. Root mean squared errors (RMSE) for the median LETdwithin the brain, brainstem, CTV, chiasm, lacrimal glands (ipsilateral/contralateral) and optic nerves (ipsilateral/contralateral) were 0.36, 0.87, 0.31, 0.73, 0.68, 1.04, 0.69 and 1.24 keV µm-1, respectively. Although model predictions showed statistically significant differences from MC outputs, these did not result in substantial changes in NTCP predictions, with RMSEs of at most 3.2 percentage points.Significance.The ability of NNs to predict LETdbased solely on planned dose distributions suggests a viable alternative to compute-intensive MC simulations in a variable-RBE setting. This is particularly useful in scenarios where MC simulation data are unavailable, facilitating resource-constrained proton therapy treatment planning, retrospective patient data analysis and further investigations on the variability of proton RBE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Starke
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Department of Information Services and Computing, Dresden, Germany
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Aaron Kieslich
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Martina Palkowitsch
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Fabian Hennings
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NTC/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NTC/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| | - Jona Bensberg
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Christian Hahn
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Feline Heinzelmann
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Christian Bäumer
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen/Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen/Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases Dresden (NTC/UCC), Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Paganetti H, Simone CB, Bosch WR, Haas-Kogan D, Kirsch DG, Li H, Liang X, Liu W, Mahajan A, Story MD, Taylor PA, Willers H, Xiao Y, Buchsbaum JC. NRG Oncology White Paper on the Relative Biological Effectiveness in Proton Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)02974-2. [PMID: 39059509 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.07.2152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2024] [Revised: 06/17/2024] [Accepted: 07/06/2024] [Indexed: 07/28/2024]
Abstract
This position paper, led by the NRG Oncology Particle Therapy Work Group, focuses on the concept of relative biologic effect (RBE) in clinical proton therapy (PT), with the goal of providing recommendations for the next-generation clinical trials with PT on the best practice of investigating and using RBE, which could deviate from the current standard proton RBE value of 1.1 relative to photons. In part 1, current clinical utilization and practice are reviewed, giving the context and history of RBE. Evidence for variation in RBE is presented along with the concept of linear energy transfer (LET). The intertwined nature of tumor radiobiology, normal tissue constraints, and treatment planning with LET and RBE considerations is then reviewed. Part 2 summarizes current and past clinical data and then suggests the next steps to explore and employ tools for improved dynamic models for RBE. In part 3, approaches and methods for the next generation of prospective clinical trials are explored, with the goal of optimizing RBE to be both more reflective of clinical reality and also deployable in trials to allow clinical validation and interpatient comparisons. These concepts provide the foundation for personalized biologic treatments reviewed in part 4. Finally, we conclude with a summary including short- and long-term scientific focus points for clinical PT. The practicalities and capacity to use RBE in treatment planning are reviewed and considered with more biological data in hand. The intermediate step of LET optimization is summarized and proposed as a potential bridge to the ultimate goal of case-specific RBE planning that can be achieved as a hypothesis-generating tool in near-term proton trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Charles B Simone
- New York Proton Center, New York, New York; Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Walter R Bosch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Daphne Haas-Kogan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David G Kirsch
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Anita Mahajan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Michael D Story
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | - Henning Willers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ying Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jeffrey C Buchsbaum
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Rana S, Manthala Padannayil N, Tran L, Rosenfeld AB, Saeed H, Kasper M. Quantifying the Dosimetric Impact of Proton Range Uncertainties on RBE-Weighted Dose Distributions in Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Bilateral Head and Neck Cancer. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:3690-3697. [PMID: 39057144 PMCID: PMC11275331 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31070272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2024] [Revised: 06/06/2024] [Accepted: 06/08/2024] [Indexed: 07/28/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In current clinical practice, intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) head and neck cancer (HNC) plans are generated using a constant relative biological effectiveness (cRBE) of 1.1. The primary goal of this study was to explore the dosimetric impact of proton range uncertainties on RBE-weighted dose (RWD) distributions using a variable RBE (vRBE) model in the context of bilateral HNC IMPT plans. METHODS The current study included the computed tomography (CT) datasets of ten bilateral HNC patients who had undergone photon therapy. Each patient's plan was generated using three IMPT beams to deliver doses to the CTV_High and CTV_Low for doses of 70 Gy(RBE) and 54 Gy(RBE), respectively, in 35 fractions through a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique. Each nominal plan calculated with a cRBE of 1.1 was subjected to the range uncertainties of ±3%. The McNamara vRBE model was used for RWD calculations. For each patient, the differences in dosimetric metrices between the RWD and nominal dose distributions were compared. RESULTS The constrictor muscles, oral cavity, parotids, larynx, thyroid, and esophagus showed average differences in mean dose (Dmean) values up to 6.91 Gy(RBE), indicating the impact of proton range uncertainties on RWD distributions. Similarly, the brachial plexus, brain, brainstem, spinal cord, and mandible showed varying degrees of the average differences in maximum dose (Dmax) values (2.78-10.75 Gy(RBE)). The Dmean and Dmax to the CTV from RWD distributions were within ±2% of the dosimetric results in nominal plans. CONCLUSION The consistent trend of higher mean and maximum doses to the OARs with the McNamara vRBE model compared to cRBE model highlighted the need for consideration of proton range uncertainties while evaluating OAR doses in bilateral HNC IMPT plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suresh Rana
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lynn Cancer Institute, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, Baptist Health South Florida, Boca Raton, FL 33486, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
| | - Noufal Manthala Padannayil
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lynn Cancer Institute, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, Baptist Health South Florida, Boca Raton, FL 33486, USA
| | - Linh Tran
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics (CMRP), University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia
| | - Anatoly B. Rosenfeld
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics (CMRP), University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia
| | - Hina Saeed
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lynn Cancer Institute, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, Baptist Health South Florida, Boca Raton, FL 33486, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
| | - Michael Kasper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lynn Cancer Institute, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, Baptist Health South Florida, Boca Raton, FL 33486, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Domingo Muñoz I, Van Hoey O, Parisi A, Bassler N, Grzanka L, De Saint-Hubert M, Vaniqui A, Olko P, Sądel M, Stolarczyk L, Vestergaard A, Jäkel O, Gardenali Yukihara E, Brage Christensen J. Assessment of fluence- and dose-averaged linear energy transfer with passive luminescence detectors in clinical proton beams. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:135004. [PMID: 38774985 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad4e8e] [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: 12/15/2023] [Accepted: 05/21/2024] [Indexed: 06/22/2024]
Abstract
Objective.This work investigates the use of passive luminescence detectors to determine different types of averaged linear energy transfer (LET-) for the energies relevant to proton therapy. The experimental results are compared to reference values obtained from Monte Carlo simulations.Approach.Optically stimulated luminescence detectors (OSLDs), fluorescent nuclear track detectors (FNTDs), and two different groups of thermoluminescence detectors (TLDs) were irradiated at four different radiation qualities. For each irradiation, the fluence- (LET-f) and dose-averaged LET (LET-d) were determined. For both quantities, two sub-types of averages were calculated, either considering the contributions from primary and secondary protons or from all protons and heavier, charged particles. Both simulated and experimental data were used in combination with a phenomenological model to estimate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE).Main results.All types ofLET-could be assessed with the luminescence detectors. The experimental determination ofLET-fis in agreement with reference data obtained from simulations across all measurement techniques and types of averaging. On the other hand,LET-dcan present challenges as a radiation quality metric to describe the detector response in mixed particle fields. However, excluding secondaries heavier than protons from theLET-dcalculation, as their contribution to the luminescence is suppressed by ionization quenching, leads to equal accuracy betweenLET-fandLET-d. Assessment of RBE through the experimentally determinedLET-dvalues agrees with independently acquired reference values, indicating that the investigated detectors can determineLET-with sufficient accuracy for proton therapy.Significance.OSLDs, TLDs, and FNTDs can be used to determineLET-and RBE in proton therapy. With the capability to determine dose through ionization quenching corrections derived fromLET-, OSLDs and TLDs can simultaneously ascertain dose,LET-, and RBE. This makes passive detectors appealing for measurements in phantoms to facilitate validation of clinical treatment plans or experiments related to proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iván Domingo 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
| | | | - Alessio Parisi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States of America
| | - Niels Bassler
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Leszek Grzanka
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IFJ PAN), Kraków, Poland
| | | | - Ana Vaniqui
- Belgian Nuclear Research Center (SCK CEN), Mol, Belgium
| | - Paweł Olko
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IFJ PAN), Kraków, Poland
| | - Michał Sądel
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IFJ PAN), Kraków, Poland
| | - Liliana Stolarczyk
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Anne Vestergaard
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - 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
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Jeppe Brage Christensen
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Tang X, Wan Chan Tseung H, Moseley D, Zverovitch A, Hughes CO, George J, Johnson JE, Breen WG, Qian J. Deep learning based linear energy transfer calculation for proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:115058. [PMID: 38714191 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad4844] [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: 11/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/07/2024] [Indexed: 05/09/2024]
Abstract
Objective.This study aims to address the limitations of traditional methods for calculating linear energy transfer (LET), a critical component in assessing relative biological effectiveness (RBE). Currently, Monte Carlo (MC) simulation, the gold-standard for accuracy, is resource-intensive and slow for dose optimization, while the speedier analytical approximation has compromised accuracy. Our objective was to prototype a deep-learning-based model for calculating dose-averaged LET (LETd) using patient anatomy and dose-to-water (DW) data, facilitating real-time biological dose evaluation and LET optimization within proton treatment planning systems.Approach. 275 4-field prostate proton Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy plans were analyzed, rendering a total of 1100 fields. Those were randomly split into 880, 110, and 110 fields for training, validation, and testing. A 3D Cascaded UNet model, along with data processing and inference pipelines, was developed to generate patient-specific LETddistributions from CT images and DW. The accuracy of the LETdof the test dataset was evaluated against MC-generated ground truth through voxel-based mean absolute error (MAE) and gamma analysis.Main results.The proposed model accurately inferred LETddistributions for each proton field in the test dataset. A single-field LETdcalculation took around 100 ms with trained models running on a NVidia A100 GPU. The selected model yielded an average MAE of 0.94 ± 0.14 MeV cm-1and a gamma passing rate of 97.4% ± 1.3% when applied to the test dataset, with the largest discrepancy at the edge of fields where the dose gradient was the largest and counting statistics was the lowest.Significance.This study demonstrates that deep-learning-based models can efficiently calculate LETdwith high accuracy as a fast-forward approach. The model shows great potential to be utilized for optimizing the RBE of proton treatment plans. Future efforts will focus on enhancing the model's performance and evaluating its adaptability to different clinical scenarios.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xueyan Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| | - Hok Wan Chan Tseung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| | - Douglas Moseley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| | | | - Cian O Hughes
- Google Inc, Mountain View, CA, United States of America
| | - Jon George
- Google Inc, Mountain View, CA, United States of America
| | - Jedediah E Johnson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| | - William G Breen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| | - Jing Qian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Deng MY, Maas SLN, Hinz F, Karger CP, Sievers P, Eichkorn T, Meixner E, Hoegen-Sassmannshausen P, Hörner-Rieber J, Lischalk JW, Seidensaal K, Bernhardt D, Jungk C, Unterberg A, Wick A, Wick W, von Deimling A, Sahm F, Combs S, Herfarth K, Debus J, König L. Efficacy and toxicity of bimodal radiotherapy in WHO grade 2 meningiomas following subtotal resection with carbon ion boost: Prospective phase 2 MARCIE trial. Neuro Oncol 2024; 26:701-712. [PMID: 38079455 PMCID: PMC10995516 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noad244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2023] [Indexed: 12/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Novel radiotherapeutic modalities using carbon ions provide an increased relative biological effectiveness (RBE) compared to photons, delivering a higher biological dose while reducing radiation exposure for adjacent organs. This prospective phase 2 trial investigated bimodal radiotherapy using photons with carbon-ion (C12)-boost in patients with WHO grade 2 meningiomas following subtotal resection (Simpson grade 4 or 5). METHODS A total of 33 patients were enrolled from July 2012 until July 2020. The study treatment comprised a C12-boost (18 Gy [RBE] in 6 fractions) applied to the macroscopic tumor in combination with photon radiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions). The primary endpoint was the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints included overall survival, safety and treatment toxicities. RESULTS With a median follow-up of 42 months, the 3-year estimates of PFS, local PFS and overall survival were 80.3%, 86.7%, and 89.8%, respectively. Radiation-induced contrast enhancement (RICE) was encountered in 45%, particularly in patients with periventricularly located meningiomas. Patients exhibiting RICE were mostly either asymptomatic (40%) or presented immediate neurological and radiological improvement (47%) after the administration of corticosteroids or bevacizumab in case of radiation necrosis (3/33). Treatment-associated complications occurred in 1 patient with radiation necrosis who died due to postoperative complications after resection of radiation necrosis. The study was prematurely terminated after recruiting 33 of the planned 40 patients. CONCLUSIONS Our study demonstrates a bimodal approach utilizing photons with C12-boost may achieve a superior local PFS to conventional photon RT, but must be balanced against the potential risks of toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maximilian Y Deng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sybren L N Maas
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Felix Hinz
- Department of Neuropathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- CCU Neuropathology, German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christian P Karger
- Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Philipp Sievers
- Department of Neuropathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- CCU Neuropathology, German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Philipp Hoegen-Sassmannshausen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, New York, USA
| | - Katharina Seidensaal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Denise Bernhardt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christine Jungk
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andreas Unterberg
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Antje Wick
- Department of Neurology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Wick
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Neurology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Neurooncology, German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andreas von Deimling
- Department of Neuropathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- CCU Neuropathology, German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Felix Sahm
- Department of Neuropathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- CCU Neuropathology, German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT Heidelberg, a partnership between DKFZ and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Voshart DC, Klaver M, Jiang Y, van Weering HRJ, van Buuren-Broek F, van der Linden GP, Cinat D, Kiewiet HH, Malimban J, Vazquez-Matias DA, Reali Nazario L, Scholma AC, Sewdihal J, van Goethem MJ, van Luijk P, Coppes RP, Barazzuol L. Proton therapy induces a local microglial neuroimmune response. Radiother Oncol 2024; 193:110117. [PMID: 38453539 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110117] [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: 06/15/2023] [Revised: 01/25/2024] [Accepted: 01/28/2024] [Indexed: 03/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Although proton therapy is increasingly being used in the treatment of paediatric and adult brain tumours, there are still uncertainties surrounding the biological effect of protons on the normal brain. Microglia, the brain-resident macrophages, have been shown to play a role in the development of radiation-induced neurotoxicity. However, their molecular and hence functional response to proton irradiation remains unknown. This study investigates the effect of protons on microglia by comparing the effect of photons and protons as well as the influence of age and different irradiated volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Rats were irradiated with 14 Gy to the whole brain with photons (X-rays), plateau protons, spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) protons or to 50 % anterior, or 50 % posterior brain sub-volumes with plateau protons. RNA sequencing, validation of microglial priming gene expression using qPCR and high-content imaging analysis of microglial morphology were performed in the cortex at 12 weeks post irradiation. RESULTS Photons and plateau protons induced a shared transcriptomic response associated with neuroinflammation. This response was associated with a similar microglial priming gene expression signature and distribution of microglial morphologies. Expression of the priming gene signature was less pronounced in juvenile rats compared to adults and slightly increased in rats irradiated with SOBP protons. High-precision partial brain irradiation with protons induced a local microglial priming response and morphological changes. CONCLUSION Overall, our data indicate that the brain responds in a similar manner to photons and plateau protons with a shared local upregulation of microglial priming-associated genes, potentially enhancing the immune response to subsequent inflammatory challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniëlle C Voshart
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Myrthe Klaver
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Yuting Jiang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Hilmar R J van Weering
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Neurobiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Fleur van Buuren-Broek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Gideon P van der Linden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Davide Cinat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Harry H Kiewiet
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, PARTREC, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9747 AA, The Netherlands
| | - Justin Malimban
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands
| | - Daniel A Vazquez-Matias
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Luiza Reali Nazario
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Ayla C Scholma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Jeffrey Sewdihal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Marc-Jan van Goethem
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, PARTREC, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9747 AA, The Netherlands
| | - Peter van Luijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Rob P Coppes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands
| | - Lara Barazzuol
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 RB, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Section of Molecular Cell Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen 9700 AD, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Lütgendorf-Caucig C, Pelak M, Hug E, Flechl B, Surböck B, Marosi C, Mock U, Zach L, Mardor Y, Furman O, Hentschel H, Gora J, Fossati P, Stock M, Graichen U, Klee S, Georg P. Prospective Analysis of Radiation-Induced Contrast Enhancement and Health-Related Quality of Life After Proton Therapy for Central Nervous System and Skull Base Tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1206-1216. [PMID: 38244874 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2023] [Revised: 01/03/2024] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Intracerebral radiation-induced contrast enhancement (RICE) can occur after photon as well as proton beam therapy (PBT). This study evaluated the incidence, characteristics, and risk factors of RICE after PBT delivered to, or in direct proximity to, the brain and its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS AND MATERIALS Four hundred twenty-one patients treated with pencil beam scanning PBT between 2017 and 2021 were included. Follow-up included clinical evaluation and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment completion and annually thereafter. RICE was graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4, and HRQoL parameters were assessed via European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-C30 questionnaires. RESULTS The median follow-up was 24 months (range, 6-54), and median dose to 1% relative volume of noninvolved central nervous system (D1%CNS) was 54.3 Gy relative biologic effectiveness (RBE; range, 30-76 Gy RBE). The cumulative RICE incidence was 15% (n = 63), of which 10.5% (n = 44) were grade 1, 3.1% (n = 13) were grade 2, and 1.4% (n = 6) were grade 3. No grade 4 or 5 events were observed. Twenty-six of 63 RICE (41.3%) had resolved at the latest follow-up. The median onset after PBT and duration of RICE in patients in whom the lesions resolved were 11.8 and 9.0 months, respectively. On multivariable analysis, D1%CNS > 57.6 Gy RBE, previous in-field radiation, and diabetes mellitus were identified as significant risk factors for RICE development. Previous radiation was the only factor influencing the risk of symptomatic RICE. After PBT, general HRQoL parameters were not compromised. In a matched cohort analysis of 54/50 patients with and without RICE, no differences in global health score or functional and symptom scales were seen. CONCLUSIONS The overall incidence of clinically relevant RICE after PBT is very low and has no significant negative effect on long-term patient QoL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Maciej Pelak
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria; University Clinic for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Uniklinikum Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
| | - Eugen Hug
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Birgit Flechl
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Birgit Surböck
- Department of Neurology, Klinikum Favoriten, Vienna, Austria
| | - Christine Marosi
- Department of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ulrike Mock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Leor Zach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel; Tel Aviv University, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Yael Mardor
- Tel Aviv University, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel; Advanced Technology Center, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Orit Furman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | | | - Joanna Gora
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Piero Fossati
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Uwe Graichen
- Department of General Health Studies, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria
| | - Sascha Klee
- Department of General Health Studies, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria
| | - Petra Georg
- Department of Radiotherapy, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, University Hospital Krems, Krems, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Nachankar A, Schafasand M, Hug E, Martino G, Góra J, Carlino A, Stock M, Fossati P. Sacral-Nerve-Sparing Planning Strategy in Pelvic Sarcomas/Chordomas Treated with Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1284. [PMID: 38610962 PMCID: PMC11010899 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16071284] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2024] [Revised: 03/20/2024] [Accepted: 03/23/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024] Open
Abstract
To minimize radiation-induced lumbosacral neuropathy (RILSN), we employed sacral-nerve-sparing optimized carbon-ion therapy strategy (SNSo-CIRT) in treating 35 patients with pelvic sarcomas/chordomas. Plans were optimized using Local Effect Model-I (LEM-I), prescribed DRBE|LEM-I|D50% (median dose to HD-PTV) = 73.6 (70.4-76.8) Gy (RBE)/16 fractions. Sacral nerves were contoured between L5-S3 levels. DRBE|LEM-I to 5% of sacral nerves-to-spare (outside HD-CTV) (DRBE|LEM-I|D5%) were restricted to <69 Gy (RBE). The median follow-up was 25 months (range of 2-53). Three patients (9%) developed late RILSN (≥G3) after an average period of 8 months post-CIRT. The RILSN-free survival at 2 years was 91% (CI, 81-100). With SNSo-CIRT, DRBE|LEM-I|D5% for sacral nerves-to-spare = 66.9 ± 1.9 Gy (RBE), maintaining DRBE|LEM-I to 98% of HD-CTV (DRBE|LEM-I|D98%) = 70 ± 3.6 Gy (RBE). Two-year OS and LC were 100% and 93% (CI, 84-100), respectively. LETd and DRBE with modified-microdosimetric kinetic model (mMKM) were recomputed retrospectively. DRBE|LEM-I and DRBE|mMKM were similar, but DRBE-filtered-LETd was higher in sacral nerves-to-spare in patients with RILSN than those without. At DRBE|LEM-I cutoff = 64 Gy (RBE), 2-year RILSN-free survival was 100% in patients with <12% of sacral nerves-to-spare voxels receiving LETd > 55 keV/µm than 75% (CI, 54-100) in those with ≥12% of voxels (p < 0.05). DRBE-filtered-LETd holds promise for the SNSo-CIRT strategy but requires longer follow-up for validation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ankita Nachankar
- ACMIT Gmbh, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (E.H.); (P.F.)
| | - Mansure Schafasand
- Department of Medical Physics, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (M.S.); (G.M.); (J.G.); (A.C.); (M.S.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Wien, Austria
- Division Medical Physics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 3500 Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Eugen Hug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (E.H.); (P.F.)
| | - Giovanna Martino
- Department of Medical Physics, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (M.S.); (G.M.); (J.G.); (A.C.); (M.S.)
| | - Joanna Góra
- Department of Medical Physics, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (M.S.); (G.M.); (J.G.); (A.C.); (M.S.)
| | - Antonio Carlino
- Department of Medical Physics, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (M.S.); (G.M.); (J.G.); (A.C.); (M.S.)
| | - Markus Stock
- Department of Medical Physics, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (M.S.); (G.M.); (J.G.); (A.C.); (M.S.)
- Division Medical Physics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 3500 Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | - Piero Fossati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (E.H.); (P.F.)
- Division Radiation Oncology, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 3500 Krems an der Donau, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Heuchel L, Hahn C, Ödén J, Traneus E, Wulff J, Timmermann B, Bäumer C, Lühr A. The dirty and clean dose concept: Towards creating proton therapy treatment plans with a photon-like dose response. Med Phys 2024; 51:622-636. [PMID: 37877574 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16809] [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: 07/03/2023] [Revised: 10/11/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Applying tolerance doses for organs at risk (OAR) from photon therapy introduces uncertainties in proton therapy when assuming a constant relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1. PURPOSE This work introduces the novel dirty and clean dose concept, which allows for creating treatment plans with a more photon-like dose response for OAR and, thus, less uncertainties when applying photon-based tolerance doses. METHODS The concept divides the 1.1-weighted dose distribution into two parts: the clean and the dirty dose. The clean and dirty dose are deposited by protons with a linear energy transfer (LET) below and above a set LET threshold, respectively. For the former, a photon-like dose response is assumed, while for the latter, the RBE might exceed 1.1. To reduce the dirty dose in OAR, a MaxDirtyDose objective was added in treatment plan optimization. It requires setting two parameters: LET threshold and max dirty dose level. A simple geometry consisting of one target volume and one OAR in water was used to study the reduction in dirty dose in the OAR depending on the choice of the two MaxDirtyDose objective parameters during plan optimization. The best performing parameter combinations were used to create multiple dirty dose optimized (DDopt) treatment plans for two cranial patient cases. For each DDopt plan, 1.1-weighted dose, variable RBE-weighted dose using the Wedenberg RBE model and dose-average LETd distributions as well as resulting normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) values were calculated and compared to the reference plan (RefPlan) without MaxDirtyDose objectives. RESULTS In the water phantom studies, LET thresholds between 1.5 and 2.5 keV/µm yielded the best plans and were subsequently used. For the patient cases, nearly all DDopt plans led to a reduced Wedenberg dose in critical OAR. This reduction resulted from an LET reduction and translated into an NTCP reduction of up to 19 percentage points compared to the RefPlan. The 1.1-weighted dose in the OARs was slightly increased (patient 1: 0.45 Gy(RBE), patient 2: 0.08 Gy(RBE)), but never exceeded clinical tolerance doses. Additionally, slightly increased 1.1-weighted dose in healthy brain tissue was observed (patient 1: 0.81 Gy(RBE), patient 2: 0.53 Gy(RBE)). The variation of NTCP values due to variation of α/β from 2 to 3 Gy was much smaller for DDopt (2 percentage points (pp)) than for RefPlans (5 pp). CONCLUSIONS The novel dirty and clean dose concept allows for creating biologically more robust proton treatment plans with a more photon-like dose response. The reduced uncertainties in RBE can, therefore, mitigate uncertainties introduced by using photon-based tolerance doses for OAR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena Heuchel
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Christian Hahn
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
- OncoRay-National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Jakob Ödén
- RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Jörg Wulff
- West German Proton Therapy Center Essen, Essen, Germany
- West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Center Essen, Essen, Germany
- West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Essen, Germany
| | - Christian Bäumer
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
- West German Proton Therapy Center Essen, Essen, Germany
- West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Essen, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Schafasand M, Resch AF, Nachankar A, Gora J, Traneus E, Glimelius L, Georg D, Stock M, Carlino A, Fossati P. Investigation on the physical dose filtered by linear energy transfer for treatment plan evaluation in carbon ion therapy. Med Phys 2024; 51:556-565. [PMID: 37727137 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16751] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 09/01/2023] [Indexed: 09/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large tumor size has been reported as a predicting factor for inferior clinical outcome in carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT). Besides the clinical factors accompanied with such tumors, larger tumors receive typically more low linear energy transfer (LET) contributions than small ones which may be the underlying physical cause. Although dose averaged LET is often used as a single parameter descriptor to quantify the beam quality, there is no evidence that this parameter is the optimal clinical predictor for the complex mixed radiation fields in CIRT. PURPOSE Purpose of this study was to investigate on a novel dosimetric quantity, namely high-LET-dose (D > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ , the physical dose filtered based on an LET threshold) as a single parameter estimator to differentiate between carbon ion treatment plans (cTP) with a small and large tumor volume. METHODS Ten cTPs with a planning target volume,PTV ≥ 500 cm 3 $\mathrm{PTV}\ge {500}\,{{\rm cm}^{3}}$ (large) and nine with aPTV < 500 cm 3 $\mathrm{PTV}<{500}\,{{\rm cm}^{3}}$ (small) were selected for this study. To find a reasonable LET threshold (L thr $\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}$ ) that results in a significant difference in terms ofD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ , the voxel based normalized high-LET-dose (D ̂ > L thr $\hat{\textrm {D}}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ ) distribution in the clinical target volume (CTV) was studied on a subset (12 out of 19 cTPs) for 18 LET thresholds, using standard distribution descriptors (mean, variance and skewness). The classical dose volume histogram concept was used to evaluate theD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ andD ̂ > L thr $\hat{\textrm {D}}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ distributions within the target of all 19 cTPs at the before determinedL thr $\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}$ . Statistical significance of the difference between the two groups in terms of meanD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ andD ̂ > L thr $\hat{\textrm {D}}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ volume histogram parameters was evaluated by means of (two-sided) t-test or Mann-Whitney-U-test. In addition, the minimum target coverage at the above determinedL thr $\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}$ was compared and validated against three other thresholds to verify its potential in differentiation between small and large volume tumors. RESULTS AnL thr $\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}$ of approximately30 keV / μ m ${30}\,{\rm keV/}\umu {\rm m}$ was found to be a reasonable threshold to classify the two groups. At this threshold, theD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ andD ̂ > L thr $\hat{\textrm {D}}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ were significantly larger (p < 0.05 $p<0.05$ ) in small CTVs. For the small tumor group, the near-minimum and medianD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ (andD ̂ > L thr $\hat{\textrm {D}}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ ) in the CTV were in average9.3 ± 1.5 Gy $9.3\pm {1.5}\,{\rm Gy}$ (0.31 ± 0.08) and13.6 ± 1.6 Gy $13.6\pm {1.6}\,{\rm Gy}$ (0.46 ± 0.06), respectively. For the large tumors, these parameters were6.6 ± 0.2 Gy $6.6\pm {0.2}\,{\rm Gy}$ (0.20 ± 0.01) and8.6 ± 0.4 Gy $8.6\pm {0.4}\,{\rm Gy}$ (0.28 ± 0.02). The difference between the two groups in terms of mean near-minimum and medianD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ (D ̂ > L thr $\hat{\textrm {D}}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ ) was 2.7 Gy (11%) and 5.0 Gy (18%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The feasibility of high-LET-dose based evaluation was shown in this study where a lowerD > L thr $\textrm {D}_{>\textrm {L}_{\textrm {thr}}}$ was found in cTPs with a large tumor size. Further investigation is needed to draw clinical conclusions. The proposed methodology in this work can be utilized for future high-LET-dose based studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mansure Schafasand
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Ankita Nachankar
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- ACMIT Gmbh, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Joanna Gora
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | | | | | - Dietmar Georg
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Department of Oncology, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| | | | - Piero Fossati
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Department of Oncology, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Huerta-Juan Y, Xicohténcatl-Hernández N, Massillon-Jl G. Linear energy transfer (LET) distribution outside small radiotherapy field edges produced by 6 MV X-rays. Sci Rep 2023; 13:21466. [PMID: 38052891 PMCID: PMC10697984 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44409-8] [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: 04/25/2023] [Accepted: 10/07/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023] Open
Abstract
In modern radiotherapy with photons, the absorbed dose outside the radiation field is generally investigated. But it is well known that the biological damage depends not only on the absorbed dose but also on LET. This work investigated the dose-average LET (LΔ,D) outside several small radiotherapy fields to provide information that can help for better evaluating the biological effect in organs at risk close to the tumour volume. The electron fluences produced in liquid water by a 6 MV X-rays Varian iX linac were calculated using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code. With the electron spectra, LΔ,D calculations were made for eight open small square fields and the reference field at water depths of 0.15 cm, 1.35 cm, 9.85 cm and 19.85 cm and several off-axis distances. The variation of LΔ,D from the centre of the beam to 2 cm outside the field's edge depends on the field size and water depth. Using radiobiological data reported in the literature for chromosomal aberrations as an endpoint for the induction of dicentrics determined in Human Lymphocytes, we estimated the maximum low-dose relative biological effectiveness, (RBEM) finding an increase of up to 100% from the centre of the beam to 2 cm from the field's edge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Y Huerta-Juan
- Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - N Xicohténcatl-Hernández
- Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico
- Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, 72410, Puebla, Mexico
| | - G Massillon-Jl
- Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Kneepkens E, Wolfs C, Wanders RG, Traneus E, Eekers D, Verhaegen F. Shoot-through proton FLASH irradiation lowers linear energy transfer in organs at risk for neurological tumors and is robust against density variations. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:215020. [PMID: 37820687 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad0280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023]
Abstract
Objective. The goal of the study was to test the hypothesis that shoot-through FLASH proton beams would lead to lower dose-averaged LET (LETD) values in critical organs, while providing at least equal normal tissue sparing as clinical proton therapy plans.Approach. For five neurological tumor patients, pencil beam scanning (PBS) shoot-through plans were made, using the maximum energy of 227 MeV and assuming a hypothetical FLASH protective factor (FPF) of 1.5. The effect of different FPF ranging from 1.2 to 1.8 on the clinical goals were also considered. LETDwas calculated for the clinical plan and the shoot-through plan, applying a 2 Gy total dose threshold (RayStation 8 A/9B and 9A-IonRPG). Robust evaluation was performed considering density uncertainty (±3% throughout entire volume).Main results.Clinical plans showed large LETDvariations compared to shoot-through plans and the maximum LETDin OAR is 1.2-8 times lower for the latter. Although less conformal, shoot-through plans met the same clinical goals as the clinical plans, for FLASH protection factors above 1.4. The FLASH shoot-through plans were more robust to density uncertainties with a maximum OAR D2%increase of 0.6 Gy versus 5.7 Gy in the clinical plans.Significance.Shoot-through proton FLASH beams avoid uncertainties in LETDdistributions and proton range, provide adequate target coverage, meet planning constraints and are robust to density variations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Kneepkens
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Cecile Wolfs
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Roel-Germ Wanders
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Erik Traneus
- RaySearch Laboratories AB, SE-103 65, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Danielle Eekers
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Frank Verhaegen
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Durante M, Bender T, Schickel E, Mayer M, Debus J, Grosshans D, Schroeder I. Aberrant choroid plexus formation in human cerebral organoids exposed to radiation. RESEARCH SQUARE 2023:rs.3.rs-3445801. [PMID: 37886443 PMCID: PMC10602134 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3445801/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2023]
Abstract
Brain tumor patients are commonly treated with radiotherapy, but the efficacy of the treatment is limited by its toxicity, particularly the risk of radionecrosis. We used human cerebral organoids to investigate the mechanisms and nature of postirradiation brain image changes commonly linked to necrosis. Irradiation of cerebral organoids lead to increased formation of ZO1+/AQP1+/CLN3+-choroid plexus (CP) structures. Increased CP formation was triggered by radiation via the NOTCH/WNT signaling pathways and associated with delayed growth and neural stem cell differentiation, but not necrosis. The effect was more pronounced in immature than in mature organoids, reflecting the clinically-observed increased radiosensitivity of the pediatric brain. Protons were more effective than X-rays at the same dose, as also observed in clinical treatments. We conclude that radiation-induced brain image-changes can be attributed to aberrant CP formation, providing a new cellular mechanism and strategy for possible countermeasures.
Collapse
|
22
|
Henjum H, Tjelta J, Fjæra LF, Pilskog S, Stokkevåg CH, Lyngholm E, Handeland AH, Ytre-Hauge KS. Influence of beam pruning techniques on LET and RBE in proton arc therapy. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1155310. [PMID: 37731633 PMCID: PMC10508957 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1155310] [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: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 08/15/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Proton arc therapy (PAT) is an emerging treatment modality that holds promise to improve target volume coverage and reduce linear energy transfer (LET) in organs at risk. We aimed to investigate if pruning the highest energy layers in each beam direction could increase the LET in the target and reduce LET in tissue and organs at risk (OAR) surrounding the target volume, thus reducing the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose and sparing healthy tissue. Methods PAT plans for a germinoma, an ependymoma and a rhabdomyosarcoma patient were created in the Eclipse treatment planning system with a prescribed dose of 54 Gy(RBE) using a constant RBE of 1.1 (RBE1.1). The PAT plans was pruned for high energy spots, creating several PAT plans with different amounts of pruning while maintaining tumor coverage, denoted PX-PAT plans, where X represents the amount of pruning. All plans were recalculated in the FLUKA Monte Carlo software, and the LET, physical dose, and variable RBE-weighted dose from the phenomenological Rørvik (ROR) model and an LET weighted dose (LWD) model were evaluated. Results and discussion For the germinoma case, all plans but the P6-PAT reduced the mean RBE-weighted dose to the surrounding healthy tissue compared to the PAT plan. The LET was increasingly higher within the PTV for each pruning iteration, where the mean LET from the P6-PAT plan was 1.5 keV / μm higher than for the PAT plan, while the P4- and P5-PAT plans provided an increase of 0.4 and 0.7 keV / μm , respectively. The other plans increased the LET by a smaller margin compared to the PAT plan. Likewise, the LET values to the healthy tissue were reduced for each degree of pruning. Similar results were found for the ependymoma and the rhabdomyosarcoma case. We demonstrated a PAT pruning technique that can increase both LET and RBE in the target volume and at the same time decreased values in healthy tissue, without affecting the target volume dose coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helge Henjum
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Johannes Tjelta
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Lars Fredrik Fjæra
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Sara Pilskog
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Camilla H. Stokkevåg
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Erlend Lyngholm
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Andreas H. Handeland
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Taasti VT, Decabooter E, Eekers D, Compter I, Rinaldi I, Bogowicz M, van der Maas T, Kneepkens E, Schiffelers J, Stultiens C, Hendrix N, Pijls M, Emmah R, Fonseca GP, Unipan M, van Elmpt W. Clinical benefit of range uncertainty reduction in proton treatment planning based on dual-energy CT for neuro-oncological patients. Br J Radiol 2023; 96:20230110. [PMID: 37493227 PMCID: PMC10461272 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20230110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2023] [Revised: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 06/14/2023] [Indexed: 07/27/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Several studies have shown that dual-energy CT (DECT) can lead to improved accuracy for proton range estimation. This study investigated the clinical benefit of reduced range uncertainty, enabled by DECT, in robust optimisation for neuro-oncological patients. METHODS DECT scans for 27 neuro-oncological patients were included. Commercial software was applied to create stopping-power ratio (SPR) maps based on the DECT scan. Two plans were robustly optimised on the SPR map, keeping the beam and plan settings identical to the clinical plan. One plan was robustly optimised and evaluated with a range uncertainty of 3% (as used clinically; denoted 3%-plan); the second plan applied a range uncertainty of 2% (2%-plan). Both plans were clinical acceptable and optimal. The dose-volume histogram parameters were compared between the two plans. Two experienced neuro-radiation oncologists determined the relevant dose difference for each organ-at-risk (OAR). Moreover, the OAR toxicity levels were assessed. RESULTS For 24 patients, a dose reduction >0.5/1 Gy (relevant dose difference depending on the OAR) was seen in one or more OARs for the 2%-plan; e.g. for brainstem D0.03cc in 10 patients, and hippocampus D40% in 6 patients. Furthermore, 12 patients had a reduction in toxicity level for one or two OARs, showing a clear benefit for the patient. CONCLUSION Robust optimisation with reduced range uncertainty allows for reduction of OAR toxicity, providing a rationale for clinical implementation. Based on these results, we have clinically introduced DECT-based proton treatment planning for neuro-oncological patients, accompanied with a reduced range uncertainty of 2%. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE This study shows the clinical benefit of range uncertainty reduction from 3% to 2% in robustly optimised proton plans. A dose reduction to one or more OARs was seen for 89% of the patients, and 44% of the patients had an expected toxicity level decrease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vicki Trier Taasti
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Esther Decabooter
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Daniëlle Eekers
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Compter
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Ilaria Rinaldi
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Marta Bogowicz
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Tim van der Maas
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Esther Kneepkens
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Jacqueline Schiffelers
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Cissy Stultiens
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Nicole Hendrix
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Mirthe Pijls
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Rik Emmah
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Gabriel Paiva Fonseca
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Mirko Unipan
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter van Elmpt
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
McIntyre M, Wilson P, Gorayski P, Bezak E. A Systematic Review of LET-Guided Treatment Plan Optimisation in Proton Therapy: Identifying the Current State and Future Needs. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4268. [PMID: 37686544 PMCID: PMC10486456 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174268] [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: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 08/16/2023] [Accepted: 08/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
The well-known clinical benefits of proton therapy are achieved through higher target-conformality and normal tissue sparing than conventional radiotherapy. However, there is an increased sensitivity to uncertainties in patient motion/setup, proton range and radiobiological effect. Although recent efforts have mitigated some uncertainties, radiobiological effect remains unresolved due to a lack of clinical data for relevant endpoints. Therefore, RBE optimisations may be currently unsuitable for clinical treatment planning. LET optimisation is a novel method that substitutes RBE with LET, shifting LET hotspots outside critical structures. This review outlines the current status of LET optimisation in proton therapy, highlighting knowledge gaps and possible future research. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a search of the MEDLINE® and Scopus databases was performed in July 2023, identifying 70 relevant articles. Generally, LET optimisation methods achieved their treatment objectives; however, clinical benefit is patient-dependent. Inconsistencies in the reported data suggest further testing is required to identify therapeutically favourable methods. We discuss the methods which are suitable for near-future clinical deployment, with fast computation times and compatibility with existing treatment protocols. Although there is some clinical evidence of a correlation between high LET and adverse effects, further developments are needed to inform future patient selection protocols for widespread application of LET optimisation in proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa McIntyre
- Allied Health & Human Performance Academic Unit, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Puthenparampil Wilson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Peter Gorayski
- Allied Health & Human Performance Academic Unit, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and Research, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Eva Bezak
- Allied Health & Human Performance Academic Unit, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
DeCunha JM, Newpower M, Mohan R. GPU-accelerated calculation of proton microdosimetric spectra as a function of target size, proton energy, and bounding volume size. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:165012. [PMID: 37429311 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ace60a] [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: 09/08/2022] [Accepted: 07/10/2023] [Indexed: 07/12/2023]
Abstract
Objective.Shortcomings of dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETD), the quantity which is most commonly used to quantify proton relative biological effectiveness, have long been recognized. Microdosimetric spectra may overcome the limitations of LETDbut are extremely computationally demanding to calculate. A systematic library of lineal energy spectra for monoenergetic protons could enable rapid determination of microdosimetric spectra in a clinical environment. The objective of this work was to calculate and validate such a library of lineal energy spectra.Approach. SuperTrack, a GPU-accelerated CUDA/C++ based application, was developed to superimpose tracks calculated using Geant4 onto targets of interest and to compute microdosimetric spectra. Lineal energy spectra of protons with energies from 0.1 to 100 MeV were determined in spherical targets of diameters from 1 nm to 10μm and in bounding voxels with side lengths of 5μm and 3 mm.Main results.Compared to an analogous Geant4-based application, SuperTrack is up to 3500 times more computationally efficient if each track is resampled 1000 times. Dose spectra of lineal energy and dose-mean lineal energy calculated with SuperTrack were consistent with values published in the literature and with comparison to a Geant4 simulation. Using SuperTrack, we developed the largest known library of proton microdosimetric spectra as a function of primary proton energy, target size, and bounding volume size.Significance. SuperTrack greatly increases the computational efficiency of the calculation of microdosimetric spectra. The elevated lineal energy observed in a 3 mm side length bounding volume suggests that lineal energy spectra determined experimentally or computed in small bounding volumes may not be representative of the lineal energy spectra in voxels of a dose calculation grid. The library of lineal energy spectra calculated in this work could be integrated with a treatment planning system for rapid determination of lineal energy spectra in patient geometries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph M DeCunha
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America
- Medical Physics Program, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, United States of America
| | - Mark Newpower
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States of America
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Handeland AH, Indelicato DJ, Fredrik Fjæra L, Ytre-Hauge KS, Pettersen HES, Muren LP, Lassen-Ramshad Y, Stokkevåg CH. Linear energy transfer-inclusive models of brainstem necrosis following proton therapy of paediatric ependymoma. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100466. [PMID: 37457667 PMCID: PMC10345333 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2023] [Revised: 06/22/2023] [Accepted: 06/24/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and Purpose Radiation-induced brainstem necrosis after proton therapy is a severe toxicity with potential association to uncertainties in the proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE). A constant RBE of 1.1 is assumed clinically, but the RBE is known to vary with linear energy transfer (LET). LET-inclusive predictive models of toxicity may therefore be beneficial during proton treatment planning. Hence, we aimed to construct models describing the association between brainstem necrosis and LET in the brainstem. Materials and methods A matched case-control cohort (n = 28, 1:3 case-control ratio) of symptomatic brainstem necrosis was selected from 954 paediatric ependymoma brain tumour patients treated with passively scattered proton therapy. Dose-averaged LET (LETd) parameters in restricted volumes (L50%, L10% and L0.1cm3, the cumulative LETd) within high-dose thresholds were included in linear- and logistic regression normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models. Results A 1 keV/µm increase in L10% to the brainstem volume receiving dose over 54 Gy(RBE) led to an increased brainstem necrosis risk [95% confidence interval] of 2.5 [0.0, 7.8] percentage points. The corresponding logistic regression model had area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.76, increasing to 0.84 with the anterior pons substructure as a second parameter. 19 [7, 350] patients with toxicity were required to associate the L10% (D > 54 Gy(RBE)) and brainstem necrosis with 80% statistical power. Conclusion The established models of brainstem necrosis illustrate a potential impact of high LET regions in patients receiving high doses to the brainstem, and thereby support LET mitigation during clinical treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andreas H. Handeland
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | | | - Lars Fredrik Fjæra
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Norway
| | | | | | - Ludvig P. Muren
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Camilla H. Stokkevåg
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Leite AMM, Bonfrate A, Da Fonseca A, Lansonneur P, Alapetite C, Mammar H, De Marzi L. Double scattering and pencil beam scanning Monte Carlo workflows for proton therapy retrospective studies on radiation-induced toxicities. Cancer Radiother 2023:S1278-3218(23)00070-7. [PMID: 37164897 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2023.02.001] [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: 12/19/2022] [Revised: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Monte Carlo (MC) simulations can be used to accurately simulate dose and linear energy transfers (LET) distributions, thereby allowing for the calculation of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of protons. We present hereby the validation and implementation of a workflow for the Monte Carlo modelling of the double scattered and pencil beam scanning proton beamlines at our institution. METHODS The TOPAS/Geant4 MC model of the clinical nozzle has been comprehensively validated against measurements. The validation also included a comparison between simulated clinical treatment plans for four representative patients and the clinical treatment planning system (TPS). Moreover, an in-house tool implemented in Python was tested to assess the variable RBE-weighted dose in proton plans, which was illustrated for a patient case with a developing radiation-induced toxicity. RESULTS The simulated range and modulation width closely matches the measurements. Gamma-indexes (3%/3mm 3D), which compare the TPS and MC computations, showed a passing rate superior to 98%. The calculated RBE-weighted dose presented a slight increase at the necrosis location, within the PTV margins. This indicates the need for reporting on the physical and biological effects of irradiation in high dose regions, especially at the healthy tissues and increased LET distributions location. CONCLUSION The results demonstrate that the Monte Carlo method can be used to independently validate a TPS calculation, and to estimate LET distributions. The features of the in-house tool can be used to correlate LET and RBE-weighted dose distributions with the incidence of radiation-induced toxicities following proton therapy treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A M M Leite
- Inserm U 1021- CNRS UMR 3347, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, University Paris Saclay, 91898, Orsay, France; Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - A Bonfrate
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - A Da Fonseca
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - P Lansonneur
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - C Alapetite
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - H Mammar
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - L De Marzi
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation Oncology Department, Proton Therapy Centre, centre universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France; Inserm LITO, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, University Paris Saclay, 91898 Orsay, France.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Magrin G, Palmans H, Stock M, Georg D. State-of-the-art and potential of experimental microdosimetry in ion-beam therapy. Radiother Oncol 2023; 182:109586. [PMID: 36842667 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109586] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2022] [Revised: 02/16/2023] [Accepted: 02/17/2023] [Indexed: 02/28/2023]
Abstract
In radiotherapy, radiation-quality should be an expression of the biological and physical characteristics of ionizing radiation such as spatial distribution of ionization or energy deposition. Linear energy transfer (LET) and lineal energy (y) are two descriptors used to quantify the radiation quality. These two quantities are connected and exhibit similar features. In ion-beam therapy (IBT), lineal energy can be measured with microdosimeters, which are specifically designed to cope with the high fluence of particles in clinical beams, while the quantification of LET is generally based on calculations. In pre-clinical studies, microdosimetric spectra are used for the indirect determination of relative biological effectiveness (RBE), e.g., using the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) or biophysical response functions. In this context it is important to consider saturation effects, which occur when the highest values of y become less biologically relevant compared to the relative contribution they make to the physical dose. Recent clinical data suggests that local tumor control and normal tissue effects can be linked to macroscopic and microscopic dosimetry parameters. In particular, positive clinical outcomes have been correlated to the highest LET values in the density distribution, and there is no evident link to the saturation discussed above. A systematic collection of microdosimetric information in combination with clinical data in retrospective studies may clarify the role of radiation quality at the highest LET. In the clinical setting, microdosimetry is not widely used yet, despite its potential to be linked with LET by experimentally-determined y values. Through this connection, both play an important role in complex therapy techniques such as intensity modulated particle therapy (IMPT), LET-painting and multi-ion optimization. This review summarizes the current state of microdosimetry for IBT and its potential, as well as research and development needed to make experimental microdosimetry a mature procedure in a clinical context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulio Magrin
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Hugo Palmans
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria; National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria; Karl Landsteiner Universität, Krems, Austria
| | - Dietmar Georg
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria; Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Jaspers JPM, Taal W, van Norden Y, Zindler JD, Swaak AT, Habraken SJM, Hoogeman MH, Nout R, van den Bent M, Méndèz Romero A. Early and late contrast enhancing lesions after photon radiotherapy for IDH mutated grade 2 diffuse glioma. Radiother Oncol 2023; 184:109674. [PMID: 37084885 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109674] [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: 11/25/2022] [Revised: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 04/10/2023] [Indexed: 04/23/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The interpretation of new enhancing lesions after radiotherapy for diffuse glioma remains a clinical challenge. We sought to characterize and classify new contrast enhancing lesions in a historical multicenter cohort of patients with IDH mutated grade 2 diffuse glioma treated with photon therapy. METHODS We reviewed all follow-up MRI's of all patients treated with radiotherapy for histologically confirmed, IDH mutated diffuse grade 2 glioma between 1-1-2007 and 31-12-2018 in two tertiary referral centers. Disease progression (PD) was defined in accordance with the RANO criteria for progressive disease in low grade glioma. Pseudoprogression (psPD) was defined as any transient contrast-enhancing lesion between the end of radiotherapy and PD, or any new contrast-enhancing lesion that remained stable over a period of 12 months in patients who did not exhibit PD. RESULTS A total of 860 MRI's of 106 patients were reviewed. psPD was identified in 24 patients (23%) on 76 MRI's. The cumulative incidence of psPD was 13% at 1 year, 22% at 5 years, and 28% at 10 years. The mean of the observed maximal volume of psPD was 2.4cc. The median Dmin in psPD lesions was 50.1 Gy. The presence of an 1p/19q codeletion was associated with an increased risk of psPD (subhazard ratio 2.34, p=0.048). psPD was asymptomatic in 83% of patients. CONCLUSION The cumulative incidence of psPD in grade 2 diffuse glioma increases over time. Consensus regarding event definition and statistical analysis is needed for comparisons between series investigating psPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J P M Jaspers
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - W Taal
- Neurology Department, Brain Tumor Center, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Y van Norden
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J D Zindler
- Department of Radiotherapy, Haaglanden Medisch Centrum, Leidschendam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - A T Swaak
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S J M Habraken
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - M H Hoogeman
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R Nout
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - M van den Bent
- Neurology Department, Brain Tumor Center, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Méndèz Romero
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Delft, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Tommasino F, Cartechini G, Righetto R, Farace P, Cianchetti M. Does variable RBE affect toxicity risks for mediastinal lymphoma patients? NTCP-based evaluation after proton therapy treatment. Phys Med 2023; 108:102569. [PMID: 36989976 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.102569] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2022] [Revised: 02/04/2023] [Accepted: 03/18/2023] [Indexed: 03/29/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Mediastinal lymphoma (ML) is a solid malignancy affecting young patients. Modern combined treatments allow obtaining good survival probability, together with a long life expectancy, and therefore with the need to minimize treatment-related toxicities. We quantified the expected toxicity risk for different organs and endpoints in ML patients treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) at our centre, accounting also for uncertainties related to variable RBE. METHODS Treatment plans for ten ML patients were recalculated with a TOPAS-based Monte Carlo code, thus retrieving information on LET and allowing the estimation of variable RBE. Published NTCP models were adopted to calculate the toxicity risk for hypothyroidism, heart valve defects, coronary heart disease and lung fibrosis. NTCP was calculated assuming both constant (i.e. 1.1) and variable RBE. The uncertainty associated with individual radiosensitivity was estimated by random sampling α/β values before RBE evaluation. RESULTS Variable RBE had a minor impact on hypothyroidism risk for 7 patients, while it led to significant increase for the remaining three (+24% risk maximum increase). Lung fibrosis was slightly affected by variable RBE, with a maximum increase of ≅ 1%. This was similar for heart valve dysfunction, with the exception of one patient showing an about 10% risk increase, which could be explained by means of large heart volume and D1 increase. DISCUSSION The use of NTCP models allows for identifying those patients associated with a higher toxicity risk. For those patients, it might be worth including variable RBE in plan evaluation.
Collapse
|
31
|
Vaniqui A, Vaassen F, Di Perri D, Eekers D, Compter I, Rinaldi I, van Elmpt W, Unipan M. Linear Energy Transfer and Relative Biological Effectiveness Investigation of Various Structures for a Cohort of Proton Patients With Brain Tumors. Adv Radiat Oncol 2023; 8:101128. [PMID: 36632089 PMCID: PMC9827037 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.101128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2022] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The current knowledge on biological effects associated with proton therapy is limited. Therefore, we investigated the distributions of dose, dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd), and the product between dose and LETd (DLETd) for a patient cohort treated with proton therapy. Different treatment planning system features and visualization tools were explored. Methods and Materials For a cohort of 24 patients with brain tumors, the LETd, DLETd, and dose was calculated for a fixed relative biological effectiveness value and 2 variable models: plan-based and phenomenological. Dose threshold levels of 0, 5, and 20 Gy were imposed for LETd visualization. The relationship between physical dose and LETd and the frequency of LETd hotspots were investigated. Results The phenomenological relative biological effectiveness model presented consistently higher dose values. For lower dose thresholds, the LETd distribution was steered toward higher values related to low treatment doses. Differences up to 26.0% were found according to the threshold. Maximum LETd values were identified in the brain, periventricular space, and ventricles. An inverse relationship between LETd and dose was observed. Frequency information to the domain of dose and LETd allowed for the identification of clusters, which steer the mean LETd values, and the identification of higher, but sparse, LETd values. Conclusions Identifying, quantifying, and recording LET distributions in a standardized fashion is necessary, because concern exists over a link between toxicity and LET hotspots. Visualizing DLETd or dose × LETd during treatment planning could allow for clinicians to make informed decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Vaniqui
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Femke Vaassen
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Dario Di Perri
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Daniëlle Eekers
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Compter
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Ilaria Rinaldi
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter van Elmpt
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Mirko Unipan
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Soltwedel J, Suckert T, Beyreuther E, Schneider M, Boucsein M, Bodenstein E, Nexhipi S, Stolz-Kieslich L, Krause M, von Neubeck C, Haase R, Lühr A, Dietrich A. Slice2Volume: Fusion of multimodal medical imaging and light microscopy data of irradiation-injured brain tissue in 3D. Radiother Oncol 2023; 182:109591. [PMID: 36858201 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109591] [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: 08/26/2022] [Revised: 01/20/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 03/03/2023]
Abstract
Comprehending cellular changes of radiation-induced brain injury is crucial to prevent and treat the pathology. We provide a unique open dataset of proton-irradiated mouse brains consisting of medical imaging, radiation dose simulations, and large-scale microscopy images, all registered into a common coordinate system. This allows dose-dependent analyses on single-cell level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johannes Soltwedel
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden 01309, Germany; DFG Cluster of Excellence Physics of Life, TU Dresden, Dresden 01307, Germany
| | - Theresa Suckert
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Institute for Research in Biomedicine (IRB Barcelona), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology (BIST), Barcelona 08028, Spain
| | - Elke Beyreuther
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiation Physics, Dresden 01328, Germany
| | - Moritz Schneider
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiation Physics, Dresden 01328, Germany
| | - Marc Boucsein
- Im Neuenheimer Feld 223, E050 Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Elisabeth Bodenstein
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden 01309, Germany
| | - Sindi Nexhipi
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden 01309, Germany
| | - Liane Stolz-Kieslich
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden 01309, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden 01307, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden 01307, Germany
| | - Cläre von Neubeck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg 69120, Germany; Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen 45147, Germany
| | - Robert Haase
- DFG Cluster of Excellence Physics of Life, TU Dresden, Dresden 01307, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden 01309, Germany; Medical Physics and Radiotherapy, Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund 44227, Germany
| | - Antje Dietrich
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden 01309, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg 69120, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Eichkorn T, Lischalk JW, Hörner-Rieber J, Deng M, Meixner E, Krämer A, Hoegen P, Sandrini E, Regnery S, Held T, Harrabi S, Jungk C, Herfarth K, Debus J, König L. Analysis of safety and efficacy of proton radiotherapy for IDH-mutated glioma WHO grade 2 and 3. J Neurooncol 2023; 162:489-501. [PMID: 36598613 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-022-04217-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2022] [Accepted: 12/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Proton beam radiotherapy (PRT) has been demonstrated to improve neurocognitive sequelae particularly. Nevertheless, following PRT, increased rates of radiation-induced contrast enhancements (RICE) are feared. How safe and effective is PRT for IDH-mutated glioma WHO grade 2 and 3? METHODS We analyzed 194 patients diagnosed with IDH-mutated WHO grade 2 (n = 128) and WHO grade 3 (n = 66) glioma who were treated with PRT from 2010 to 2020. Serial clinical and imaging follow-up was performed for a median of 5.1 years. RESULTS For WHO grade 2, 61% were astrocytoma and 39% oligodendroglioma while for WHO grade 3, 55% were astrocytoma and 45% oligodendroglioma. Median dose for IDH-mutated glioma was 54 Gy(RBE) [range 50.4-60 Gy(RBE)] for WHO grade 2 and 60 Gy(RBE) [range 54-60 Gy(RBE)] for WHO grade 3. Five year overall survival was 85% in patients with WHO grade 2 and 67% in patients with WHO grade 3 tumors. Overall RICE risk was 25%, being higher in patients with WHO grade 2 (29%) versus in patients with WHO grade 3 (17%, p = 0.13). RICE risk increased independent of tumor characteristics with older age (p = 0.017). Overall RICE was symptomatic in 31% of patients with corresponding CTCAE grades as follows: 80% grade 1, 7% grade 2, 13% grade 3, and 0% grade 3 + . Overall need for RICE-directed therapy was 35%. CONCLUSION These data demonstrate the effectiveness of PRT for IDH-mutated glioma WHO grade 2 and 3. The RICE risk differs with WHO grading and is higher in older patients with IDH-mutated Glioma WHO grade 2 and 3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York, University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, NY, USA
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Maximilian Deng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Anna Krämer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Philipp Hoegen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Elisabetta Sandrini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Jungk
- Department of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Eulitz J, G C Troost E, Klünder L, Raschke F, Hahn C, Schulz E, Seidlitz A, Thiem J, Karpowitz C, Hahlbohm P, Grey A, Engellandt K, Löck S, Krause M, Lühr A. Increased relative biological effectiveness and periventricular radiosensitivity in proton therapy of glioma patients. Radiother Oncol 2023; 178:109422. [PMID: 36435337 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.11.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2022] [Revised: 10/25/2022] [Accepted: 11/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Currently, there is an intense debate on variations in intra-cerebral radiosensitivity and relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in proton therapy of primary brain tumours. Here, both effects were retrospectively investigated using late radiation-induced brain injuries (RIBI) observed in follow-up after proton therapy of patients with diagnosed glioma. METHODS In total, 42 WHO grade 2-3 glioma patients out of a consecutive patient cohort having received (adjuvant) proton radio(chemo)therapy between 2014 and 2017 were eligible for analysis. RIBI lesions (symptomatic or clinically asymptomatic) were diagnosed and delineated on contrast-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans obtained in the first two years of follow-up. Correlation of RIBI location and occurrence with dose (D), proton dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LET) and variable RBE dose parameters were tested in voxel- and in patient-wise logistic regression analyses. Additionally, anatomical and clinical parameters were considered. Model performance was estimated through cross-validated area-under-the-curve (AUC) values. RESULTS In total, 64 RIBI lesions were diagnosed in 21 patients. The median time between start of proton radio(chemo)therapy and RIBI appearance was 10.2 months. Median distances of the RIBI volume centres to the cerebral ventricles and to the clinical target volume border were 2.1 mm and 1.3 mm, respectively. In voxel-wise regression, the multivariable model with D, D × LET and periventricular region (PVR) revealed the highest AUC of 0.90 (95 % confidence interval: 0.89-0.91) while the corresponding model without D × LET revealed a value of 0.84 (0.83-0.86). In patient-level analysis, the equivalent uniform dose (EUD11, a = 11) in the PVR using a variable RBE was the most prominent predictor for RIBI with an AUC of 0.63 (0.32-0.90). CONCLUSIONS In this glioma cohort, an increased radiosensitivity within the PVR was observed as well as a spatial correlation of RIBI with an increased RBE. Both need to be considered when delivering radio(chemo)therapy using proton beams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Eulitz
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lauritz Klünder
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Felix Raschke
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Hahn
- 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; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Erik Schulz
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Annekatrin Seidlitz
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Justus Thiem
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Caroline Karpowitz
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Patricia Hahlbohm
- 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; Institute and Polyclinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Arne Grey
- National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Institute and Polyclinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Kay Engellandt
- National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Institute and Polyclinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- 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, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Kasamatsu K, Matsuura T, Yasuda K, Miyazaki K, Takao S, Tamura M, Otsuka M, Uchinami Y, Aoyama H. Hyperfractionated intensity-modulated proton therapy for pharyngeal cancer with variable relative biological effectiveness: A simulation study. Med Phys 2022; 49:7815-7825. [PMID: 36300598 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16064] [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: 06/30/2022] [Revised: 10/06/2022] [Accepted: 10/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of proton is considered to be dependent on biological parameters and fractional dose. While hyperfractionated photon therapy was effective in the treatment of patients with head and neck cancers, its effect in intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) under the variable RBE has not been investigated in detail. PURPOSE To study the effect of variable RBE on hyperfractionated IMPT for the treatment of pharyngeal cancer. We investigated the biologically effective dose (BED) to determine the theoretical effective hyperfractionated schedule. METHODS The treatment plans of three pharyngeal cancer patients were used to define the ΔBED for the clinical target volume (CTV) and soft tissue (acute and late reaction) as the difference between the BED for the altered schedule with variable RBE and conventional schedule with constant RBE. The ΔBED with several combinations of parameters (treatment days, number of fractions, and prescribed dose) was comprehensively calculated. Of the candidate schedules, the one that commonly gave a higher ΔBED for CTV was selected as the resultant schedule. The BED volume histogram was used to compare the influence of variable RBE and fractionation. RESULTS In the conventional schedule, compared with the constant RBE, the variable RBE resulted in a mean 2.6 and 2.7 Gy reduction of BEDmean for the CTV and soft tissue (acute reaction) of the three plans, respectively. Moreover, the BEDmean for soft tissue (late reaction) increased by 7.4 Gy, indicating a potential risk of increased RBE. Comprehensive calculation of the ΔBED resulted in the hyperfractionated schedule of 80.52 Gy (RBE = 1.1)/66 fractions in 6.5 weeks. When variable RBE was used, compared with the conventional schedule, the hyperfractionated schedule increased the BEDmean for CTV by 7.6 Gy; however, this was associated with a 7.8 Gy increase for soft tissue (acute reaction). The BEDmean for soft tissue (late reaction) decreased by 2.4 Gy. CONCLUSION The results indicated a potential effect of the variable RBE on IMPT for pharyngeal cancer but with the possibility that hyperfractionation could outweigh this effect. Although biological uncertainties require conservative use of the resultant schedule, hyperfractionation is expected to be an effective strategy in IMPT for pharyngeal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koki Kasamatsu
- Graduate School of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Taeko Matsuura
- Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.,Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.,Proton Beam Therapy Center, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Koichi Yasuda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Koichi Miyazaki
- Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.,Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.,Research and Development Group, Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi-shi, Japan
| | - Seishin Takao
- Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.,Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.,Proton Beam Therapy Center, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Masaya Tamura
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Manami Otsuka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Yusuke Uchinami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Hidefumi Aoyama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Yang Y, Rwigema JCM, Vargas C, Yu NY, Keole SR, Wong WW, Schild SE, Bues M, Liu W, Shen J. Technical note: Investigation of dose and LET d effect to rectum and bladder by using non-straight laterals in prostate cancer receiving proton therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:7428-7437. [PMID: 36208196 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16008] [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: 06/01/2022] [Revised: 09/02/2022] [Accepted: 09/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Parallel-opposed lateral beams are the conventional beam arrangements in proton therapy for prostate cancer. However, when considering linear energy transfer (LET) and RBE effects, alternative beam arrangements should be investigated. PURPOSE To investigate the dose and dose averaged LET (LETd ) impact of using new beam arrangements rotating beams 5°-15° posteriorly to the laterals in prostate cancer treated with pencil-beam-scanning (PBS) proton therapy. METHODS Twenty patients with localized prostate cancer were included in this study. Four proton treatment plans for each patient were generated utilizing 0°, 5°, 10°, and 15° posterior oblique beam pairs relative to parallel-opposed lateral beams. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) from posterior oblique beams were analyzed. Dose-LETd -volume histogram (DLVH) was employed to study the difference in dose and LETd with each beam arrangement. DLVH indices, V ( d , l ) $V( {d,l} )$ , defined as the cumulative absolute volume that has a dose of at least d (Gy[RBE]) and a LETd of at least l (keV/µm), were calculated for both the rectum and bladder to the whole group of patients and two-sub groups with and without hydrogel spacer. These metrics were tested using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS Rotating beam angles from laterals to slightly posterior by 5°-15° reduced high LETd volumes while it increased the dose volume in the rectum and increased LETd in bladders. Beam angles rotated five degrees posteriorly from laterals (i.e., gantry in 95° and 265°) are proposed since they achieved the optimal balance of better LETd sparing and minimal dose increase in the rectum. A reduction of V(50 Gy[RBE], 2.6 keV/µm) from 7.41 to 3.96 cc (p < 0.01), and a slight increase of V(50 Gy[RBE], 0 keV/µm) from 20.1 to 21.6 cc (p < 0.01) were observed for the group without hydrogel spacer. The LETd sparing was less effective for the group with hydrogel spacer, which achieved the reduction of V(50 Gy[RBE], 2.6 keV/µm) from 4.28 to 2.10 cc (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Posterior oblique angle plans improved LETd sparing of the rectum while sacrificing LETd sparing in the bladder in the treatment of prostate cancer with PBS. Beam angle modification from laterals to slightly posterior may be a strategy to redistribute LETd and perhaps reduce rectal toxicity risks in prostate cancer patients treated with PBS. However, the effect is reduced for patients with hydrogel spacer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yunze Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | | | - Carlos Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Nathan Y Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Sameer R Keole
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - William W Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Steven E Schild
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Martin Bues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Jiajian Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Mori Y, Okonogi N, Matsumoto S, Furuichi W, Fukahori M, Miyasaka Y, Murata K, Wakatsuki M, Imai R, Koto M, Yamada S, Ishikawa H, Kanematsu N, Tsuji H. Effects of dose and dose-averaged linear energy transfer on pelvic insufficiency fractures after carbon-ion radiotherapy for uterine carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 2022; 177:33-39. [PMID: 36252637 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2022] [Revised: 10/07/2022] [Accepted: 10/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The correlation between dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) and its therapeutic or adverse effects, especially in carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT), remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effects of LETd and dose on pelvic insufficiency fractures after CIRT. MATERIAL AND METHODS Among patients who underwent CIRT for uterine carcinoma, 101 who were followed up for > 6 months without any other therapy were retrospectively analyzed. The sacrum insufficiency fractures (SIFs) were graded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer toxicity criteria. The correlations between the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose, LETd, physical dose, clinical factors, and SIFs were evaluated. In addition, we analyzed the association of SIF with LETd, physical dose, and clinical factors in cases where the sacrum D50% RBE-weighted dose was above the median dose. RESULTS At the last follow-up, 19 patients developed SIFs. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the sacrum D50% RBE-weighted dose was a valuable predictor of SIF. Univariate analyses suggested that LETd V10 keV/µm, physical dose V5 Gy, and smoking status were associated with SIF. Cox regression analysis in patients over 50 years of age validated that current smoking habit was the sole risk factor for SIF. Therefore, LETd or physical dose parameters were not associated with SIF prediction. CONCLUSION The sacrum D50% RBE-weighted dose was identified as a risk factor for SIF. Additionally, neither LETd nor physical dose parameters were associated with SIF prediction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasumasa Mori
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan; Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15, Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma 371-8511, Japan.
| | - Noriyuki Okonogi
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Shinnosuke Matsumoto
- Department of Accelerator and Medical Physics, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology.
| | - Wataru Furuichi
- Accelerator Engineering Corporation, 6-18-1-301 Konakadai, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-0043, Japan.
| | - Mai Fukahori
- Managing Unit, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Yuhei Miyasaka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15, Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma 371-8511, Japan.
| | - Kazutoshi Murata
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Masaru Wakatsuki
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Reiko Imai
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Masashi Koto
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Shigeru Yamada
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Hitoshi Ishikawa
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| | - Nobuyuki Kanematsu
- Department of Accelerator and Medical Physics, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology.
| | - Hiroshi Tsuji
- QST Hospital, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Sarrut D, Arbor N, Baudier T, Borys D, Etxebeste A, Fuchs H, Gajewski J, Grevillot L, Jan S, Kagadis GC, Kang HG, Kirov A, Kochebina O, Krzemien W, Lomax A, Papadimitroulas P, Pommranz C, Roncali E, Rucinski A, Winterhalter C, Maigne L. The OpenGATE ecosystem for Monte Carlo simulation in medical physics. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67:10.1088/1361-6560/ac8c83. [PMID: 36001985 PMCID: PMC11149651 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac8c83] [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: 04/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
This paper reviews the ecosystem of GATE, an open-source Monte Carlo toolkit for medical physics. Based on the shoulders of Geant4, the principal modules (geometry, physics, scorers) are described with brief descriptions of some key concepts (Volume, Actors, Digitizer). The main source code repositories are detailed together with the automated compilation and tests processes (Continuous Integration). We then described how the OpenGATE collaboration managed the collaborative development of about one hundred developers during almost 20 years. The impact of GATE on medical physics and cancer research is then summarized, and examples of a few key applications are given. Finally, future development perspectives are indicated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Sarrut
- Université de Lyon; CREATIS; CNRS UMR5220; Inserm U1294; INSA-Lyon; Université Lyon 1, Léon Bérard cancer center, Lyon, France
| | - Nicolas Arbor
- Université de Strasbourg, IPHC, CNRS, UMR7178, F-67037 Strasbourg, France
| | - Thomas Baudier
- Université de Lyon; CREATIS; CNRS UMR5220; Inserm U1294; INSA-Lyon; Université Lyon 1, Léon Bérard cancer center, Lyon, France
| | - Damian Borys
- Department of Systems Biology and Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Ane Etxebeste
- Université de Lyon; CREATIS; CNRS UMR5220; Inserm U1294; INSA-Lyon; Université Lyon 1, Léon Bérard cancer center, Lyon, France
| | - Hermann Fuchs
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Medical University of Vienna, Department of Radiation Oncology, Vienna, Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090 Wien, Austria
| | - Jan Gajewski
- Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| | | | - Sébastien Jan
- Université Paris-Saclay, Inserm, CNRS, CEA, Laboratoire d'Imagerie Biomédicale Multimodale (BioMaps), F-91401 Orsay, France
| | - George C Kagadis
- 3DMI Research Group, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, University of Patras, Patras, Greece
| | - Han Gyu Kang
- National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology (QST), 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, Japan
| | - Assen Kirov
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY 10021, United States of America
| | - Olga Kochebina
- Université Paris-Saclay, Inserm, CNRS, CEA, Laboratoire d'Imagerie Biomédicale Multimodale (BioMaps), F-91401 Orsay, France
| | - Wojciech Krzemien
- High Energy Physics Division, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock-Świerk, Poland
- Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, S. Lojasiewicza 11, 30-348 Krakow, Poland
- Centre for Theranostics, Jagiellonian University, Kopernika 40 St, 31 501 Krakow, Poland
| | - Antony Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, PSI, Switzerland
- Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Christian Pommranz
- Werner Siemens Imaging Center, Department of Preclinical Imaging and Radiopharmacy, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, Roentgenweg 13, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany
- Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, Sand 1, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Emilie Roncali
- University of California Davis, Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Radiology, Davis, CA 95616, United States of America
| | - Antoni Rucinski
- Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| | - Carla Winterhalter
- Center for Proton Therapy, PSI, Switzerland
- Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Lydia Maigne
- Université Clermont Auvergne, Laboratoire de Physique de Clermont, CNRS, UMR 6533, F-63178 Aubière, France
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
DEGRO practical guideline for central nervous system radiation necrosis part 1: classification and a multistep approach for diagnosis. Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 198:873-883. [PMID: 36038669 PMCID: PMC9515024 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01994-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The Working Group for Neuro-Oncology of the German Society for Radiation Oncology in cooperation with members of the Neuro-Oncology Working Group of the German Cancer Society aimed to define a practical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of radiation-induced necrosis (RN) of the central nervous system (CNS). METHODS Panel members of the DEGRO working group invited experts, participated in a series of conferences, supplemented their clinical experience, performed a literature review, and formulated recommendations for medical treatment of RN including bevacizumab in clinical routine. CONCLUSION Diagnosis and treatment of RN requires multidisciplinary structures of care and defined processes. Diagnosis has to be made on an interdisciplinary level with the joint knowledge of a neuroradiologist, radiation oncologist, neurosurgeon, neuropathologist, and neuro-oncologist. A multistep approach as an opportunity to review as many characteristics as possible to improve diagnostic confidence is recommended. Additional information about radiotherapy (RT) techniques is crucial for the diagnosis of RN. Misdiagnosis of untreated and progressive RN can lead to severe neurological deficits. In this practice guideline, we propose a detailed nomenclature of treatment-related changes and a multistep approach for their diagnosis.
Collapse
|
40
|
Eichkorn T, Lischalk JW, Sandrini E, Meixner E, Regnery S, Held T, Bauer J, Bahn E, Harrabi S, Hörner-Rieber J, Herfarth K, Debus J, König L. Iatrogenic Influence on Prognosis of Radiation-Induced Contrast Enhancements in Patients with Glioma WHO 1-3 following Photon and Proton Radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:133-143. [PMID: 36041565 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 07/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Radiation-induced contrast enhancement (RICE) is a common side effect following radiotherapy for glioma, but both diagnosis and handling are challenging. Due to the potential risks associated with RICE and its challenges in differentiating RICE from tumor progression, it is critical to better understand how RICE prognosis depends on iatrogenic influence. MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified 99 patients diagnosed with RICE who were previously treated with either photon or proton therapy for World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1-3 primary gliomas. Post-treatment brain MRI-based volumetric analysis and clinical data collection was performed at multiple time points. RESULTS The most common histologic subtypes were astrocytoma (50%) and oligodendroglioma (46%). In 67%, it was graded WHO grade 2 and in 86% an IDH mutation was present. RICE first occurred after 16 months (range: 1 - 160) in median. At initial RICE occurrence, 39% were misinterpreted as tumor progression. A tumor-specific therapy including chemotherapy or re-irradiation led to a RICE size progression in 86% and 92% of cases, respectively and RICE symptom progression in 57% and 65% of cases, respectively. A RICE-specific therapy such as corticosteroids or Bevacizumab for larger or symptomatic RICE led to a RICE size regression in 81% of cases with symptom stability or regression in 62% of cases. CONCLUSIONS While with chemotherapy and re-irradiation a RICE progression was frequently observed, anti-edematous or anti-VEGF treatment frequently went along with a RICE regression. For RICE, correct diagnosis and treatment decisions are challenging and critical and should be made interdisciplinarily.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Elisabetta Sandrini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Eva Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Sebastian Regnery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Thomas Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Julia Bauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Emanuel Bahn
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
A systematic review of clinical studies on variable proton Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE). Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:79-92. [PMID: 35988776 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Revised: 08/05/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
Recently, a number of clinical studies have explored links between possible Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) elevations and patient toxicities and/or image changes following proton therapy. Our objective was to perform a systematic review of such studies. We applied a "Problem [RBE], Intervention [Protons], Population [Patients], Outcome [Side effect]" search strategy to the PubMed database. From our search, we retrieved studies which: (a) performed novel voxel-wise analyses of patient effects versus physical dose and LET (n = 13), and (b) compared image changes between proton and photon cohorts with regard to proton RBE (n = 9). For each retrieved study, we extracted data regarding: primary tumour type; size of patient cohort; type of image change studied; image-registration method (deformable or rigid); LET calculation method, and statistical methodology. We compared and contrasted their methods in order to discuss the weight of clinical evidence for variable proton RBE. We concluded that clinical evidence for variable proton RBE remains statistically weak at present. Our principal recommendation is that proton centres and clinical trial teams collaborate to standardize follow-up protocols and statistical analysis methods, so that larger patient cohorts can ultimately be considered for RBE analyses.
Collapse
|
42
|
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
|
43
|
Frame CM, Chen Y, Gagnon J, Yuan Y, Ma T, Dritschilo A, Pang D. Proton induced DNA double strand breaks at the Bragg peak: Evidence of enhanced LET effect. Front Oncol 2022; 12:930393. [PMID: 35992825 PMCID: PMC9388940 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.930393] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
PurposeTo investigate DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) induced by therapeutic proton beams in plateau and Bragg peak to demonstrate DSB induction due to the higher LET in the Bragg peak.Materials and MethodspUC19 plasmid DNA samples were irradiated to doses of 1000 and 3000 Gy on a Mevion S250i proton system with a monoenergetic, 110 MeV, proton beam at depths of 2 and 9.4 cm, corresponding to a position on the plateau and distal Bragg peak of the beam, respectively. The irradiated DNA samples were imaged by atomic force microscopy for visualization of individual DNA molecules, either broken or intact, and quantification of the DNA fragment length distributions for each of the irradiated samples. Percentage of the broken DNA and average number of DSBs per DNA molecule were obtained.ResultsCompared to irradiation effects in the plateau region, DNA irradiated at the Bragg peak sustained more breakage at the same dose, yielding more short DNA fragments and higher numbers of DSB per DNA molecule.ConclusionThe higher LET of proton beams at the Bragg peak results in more densely distributed DNA DSBs, which supports an underlying mechanism for the increased cell killing by protons at the Bragg peak.
Collapse
|
44
|
A case-control study of linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness related to symptomatic brainstem toxicity following pediatric proton therapy. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:47-55. [PMID: 35917900 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.07.022] [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: 04/07/2022] [Revised: 06/28/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE A fixed relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 (RBE1.1) is used clinically in proton therapy even though the RBE varies with properties such as dose level and linear energy transfer (LET). We therefore investigated if symptomatic brainstem toxicity in pediatric brain tumor patients treated with proton therapy could be associated with a variable LET and RBE. MATERIALS AND METHODS 36 patients treated with passive scattering proton therapy were selected for a case-control study from a cohort of 954 pediatric brain tumor patients. Nine children with symptomatic brainstem toxicity were each matched to three controls based on age, diagnosis, adjuvant therapy, and brainstem RBE1.1 dose characteristics. Differences across cases and controls related to the dose-averaged LET (LETd) and variable RBE-weighted dose from two RBE models were analyzed in the high-dose region. RESULTS LETd metrics were marginally higher for cases vs. controls for the majority of dose levels and brainstem substructures. Considering areas with doses above 54 Gy(RBE1.1), we found a moderate trend of 13% higher median LETd in the brainstem for cases compared to controls (P = .08), while the difference in the median variable RBE-weighted dose for the same structure was only 2% (P = .6). CONCLUSION Trends towards higher LETd for cases compared to controls were noticeable across structures and LETd metrics for this patient cohort. While case-control differences were minor, an association with the observed symptomatic brainstem toxicity cannot be ruled out.
Collapse
|
45
|
Yang Y, Patel SH, Bridhikitti J, Wong WW, Halyard MY, McGee LA, Rwigema JCM, Schild SE, Vora SA, Liu T, Bues M, Fatyga M, Foote RL, Liu W. Exploratory study of seed spots analysis to characterize dose and linear energy transfer effect in adverse event initialization of pencil beam scanning proton therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:6237-6252. [PMID: 35820062 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2022] [Revised: 06/20/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Both dose and linear-energy-transfer (LET) could play a substantial role in adverse event (AE) initialization of cancer patients treated with pencil-beam-scanning proton therapy (PBS). However, not all the voxels within the AE regions are directly induced from the dose and LET effect. It is important to study the synergistic effect of dose and LET in AE initialization by only including a subset of voxels that are dosimetrically important. PURPOSE To perform exploratory investigation of the dose and LET effects upon AE initialization in PBS using seed spots analysis. METHODS 113 head and neck (H&N) cancer patients receiving curative PBS were included. Among them, 20 patients experienced unanticipated CTCAEv4.0 grade≥3 AEs (AE group) and 93 patients did not (control group). Within the AE group, 13 AE patients were included in the seed spot analysis to derive the descriptive features of AE initialization and the remaining 7 mandible osteoradionecrosis patients and 93 control patients were used to derive the feature-based volume constraint of mandible osteoradionecrosis. The AE regions were contoured and the corresponding dose-LET volume histograms (DLVHs) of AE regions were generated for all patients in the AE group. We selected high LET voxels (the highest 5% of each dose bin) with a range of moderate to high dose (≥∼40 Gy[RBE]) as critical voxels. Critical voxels which were contiguous with each other were grouped into clusters. Each cluster was considered as a potential independent seed spot for AE initialization. Seed spots were displayed in a 2D dose-LET plane based on their mean dose and LET to derive the descriptive features of AE initialization. A volume constraint of mandible osteoradionecrosis was then established based on the extracted features using a receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS The product of dose and LET (xBD) was found to be a descriptive feature of seed spots leading to AE initialization in this preliminary study. The derived xBD volume constraint for mandible osteoradionecrosis showed good performance with an area-under-curve of 0.87 (sensitivity of 0.714 and specificity of 0.807 in the leave-one-out cross validation) for the very limited patient data included in this study. CONCLUSION Our exploratory study showed that both dose and LET were observed to be important in AE initializations. The derived xBD volume constraint could predict mandible osteoradionecrosis reasonably well in the very limited H&N cancer patient data treated with PBS included in this study. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yunze Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Samir H Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Jidapa Bridhikitti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - William W Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Michele Y Halyard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | | | - Steven E Schild
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Sujay A Vora
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Tianming Liu
- Department of Computer Science, the University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA
| | - Martin Bues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Mirek Fatyga
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Robert L Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Tian L, Hahn C, Lühr A. An ion-independent phenomenological relative biological effectiveness (RBE) model for proton therapy. Radiother Oncol 2022; 174:69-76. [PMID: 35803365 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.06.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2022] [Revised: 06/14/2022] [Accepted: 06/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 is used for proton therapy though clinical evidence of varying RBE was raised. Clinical studies on RBE variability have been conducted for decades for carbon radiation, which could advance the understanding of the clinical proton RBE given an ion-independent RBE model. In this work, such a model, linear and simple, using the beam quantity Q = Z2/E (Z = ion charge, E = kinetic energy per nucleon) was tested and compared to the commonly used, proton-specific and linear energy transfer (LET) based Wedenberg RBE model. MATERIAL AND METHODS The Wedenberg and Q models, both predicting RBEmax and RBEmin (i.e., RBE at vanishing and very high dose, respectively), are compared in terms of ion-dependence and prediction power. An experimental in-vitro data ensemble covering 115 publications for various ions was used as dataset. RESULTS The model parameter of the Q model was observed to be similar for different ions (in contrast to LET). The Q model was trained without any prior knowledge of proton data. For proton RBE, the differences between experimental data and corresponding predictions of the Wedenberg or the Q model were highly comparable. CONCLUSIONS A simple linear RBE model using Q instead of LET was proposed and tested to be able to predict proton RBE using model parameter trained based on only RBE data of other particles in a clinical proton energy range for a large in-vitro dataset. Adding (pre)clinical knowledge from carbon ion therapy may, therefore, reduce the dominating biological uncertainty in proton RBE modelling. This would translate in reduced RBE related uncertainty in proton therapy treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liheng Tian
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany.
| | - Christian Hahn
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany; 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; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- TU Dortmund University, Department of Physics, Dortmund, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Heuchel L, Hahn C, Pawelke J, Sørensen BS, Dosanjh M, Lühr A. Clinical use and future requirements of relative biological effectiveness: survey among all european proton therapy centres. Radiother Oncol 2022; 172:134-139. [PMID: 35605747 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2022] [Revised: 04/29/2022] [Accepted: 05/15/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) varies along the treatment field. However, in clinical practice, a constant RBE of 1.1 is assumed, which can result in undesirable side effects. This study provides an accurate overview of current clinical practice for considering proton RBE in Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS A survey was devised and sent to all proton therapy centres in Europe that treat patients. The online questionnaire consisted of 39 questions addressing various aspects of RBE consideration in clinical practice, including treatment planning, patient follow-up and future demands. RESULTS All 25 proton therapy centres responded. All centres prescribed a constant RBE of 1.1, but also applied measures (except for one eye treatment centre) to counteract variable RBE effects such as avoiding beams stopping inside or in front of an organ at risk and putting restrictions on the minimum number and opening angle of incident beams for certain treatment sites. For the future, most centres (16) asked for more retrospective or prospective outcome studies investigating the potential effect of the effect of a variable RBE. To perform such studies, 18 centres asked for LET and RBE calculation and visualisation tools developed by treatment planning system vendors. CONCLUSION All European proton centres are aware of RBE variability but comply with current guidelines of prescribing a constant RBE. However, they actively mitigate uncertainty and risk of side effects resulting from increased RBE by applying measures and restrictions during treatment planning. To change RBE-related clinical guidelines in the future more clinical data on RBE are explicitly demanded.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena Heuchel
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Germany
| | - Christian Hahn
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Germany; OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
| | - 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, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Germany
| | - Brita Singers Sørensen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Danish Center for Particle Therapy, DCPT, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | - Manjit Dosanjh
- Department of Physics, University of Oxford, UK; CERN, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Armin Lühr
- Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Radiation-induced contrast enhancement following proton radiotherapy for low-grade glioma depends on tumor characteristics and is rarer in children than adults. Radiother Oncol 2022; 172:54-64. [PMID: 35568281 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 04/21/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Proton beam radiotherapy (PRT) is used in the treatment of low-grade glioma (LGG) to mitigate long-term sequelae. Following PRT, increased rates of radiation-induced contrast enhancements (RICE) are suspected but poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS We analyzed consecutive 227 patients (42 children and 185 adults) treated with PRT (54Gy RBE) for LGG from 2010 to 2020 and followed with serial clinical exams and magnetic resonance imaging for in median 5.6 years. RESULTS Tumors were graded WHO 1 in a minority (n = 22, 12%) of adults, but a majority of children (n = 29, 69%). In contrast, tumors were graded WHO 2 in the majority (n = 160, 87%) of adults and a minority of children (n = 10, 24%). Five-year overall survival following PRT was 81% in adults and 91% in children. The risk of RICE was 5-fold more frequent in adults (25%) versus children (5%) (p = 0.0043). In children and adults, RICE were symptomatic in 50% and 55% (n=1 and 26) of cases with CTCAE grade 0 in 47% (n=23), grade 1 in 25% (n=12), 0% grade 2 (n=0) and 29% grade 3 (n=14), respectively. In adults, RICE risk was associated to WHO grading (8% in WHO grade 1 vs. 24% in WHO grade 2, p = 0.026), independent of age (p=0.44) and irradiation dose (p=0.005), but not independent of IDH mutational status. CONCLUSIONS These data demonstrate effectiveness of PRT for LGG in both children and adults. The RICE risk is lower in children which are a main target group for PRT and differs with WHO grading.
Collapse
|
49
|
Qi Y, Mao L, Lu H, Jin S, Huang J, Wang Z, Zhang J, Wang K. Multi-centric analysis of linear energy transfer distribution from clinical proton beam based on TOPAS. Radiat Phys Chem Oxf Engl 1993 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
50
|
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
|