1
|
Sala C, Tarozzi M, Simonetti G, Pazzaglia M, Cammarata FP, Russo G, Acquaviva R, Cirrone GAP, Petringa G, Catalano R, Elia VC, Fede F, Manti L, Castellani G, Remondini D, Zironi I. Impact on the Transcriptome of Proton Beam Irradiation Targeted at Healthy Cardiac Tissue of Mice. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1471. [PMID: 38672554 PMCID: PMC11048382 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16081471] [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: 02/23/2024] [Revised: 03/20/2024] [Accepted: 04/02/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton beam therapy is considered a step forward with respect to electromagnetic radiation, thanks to the reduction in the dose delivered. Among unwanted effects to healthy tissue, cardiovascular complications are a known long-term radiotherapy complication. The transcriptional response of cardiac tissue from xenografted BALB/c nude mice obtained at 3 and 10 days after proton irradiation covering both the tumor region and the underlying healthy tissue was analyzed as a function of dose and time. Three doses were used: 2 Gy, 6 Gy, and 9 Gy. The intermediate dose had caused the greatest impact at 3 days after irradiation: at 2 Gy, 219 genes were differently expressed, many of them represented by zinc finger proteins; at 6 Gy, there were 1109, with a predominance of genes involved in energy metabolism and responses to stimuli; and at 9 Gy, there were 105, mainly represented by zinc finger proteins and molecules involved in the regulation of cardiac function. After 10 days, no significant effects were detected, suggesting that cellular repair mechanisms had defused the potential alterations in gene expression. The nonlinear dose-response curve indicates a need to update the models built on photons to improve accuracy in health risk prediction. Our data also suggest a possible role for zinc finger protein genes as markers of proton therapy efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia Sala
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy; (C.S.); (G.C.)
| | - Martina Tarozzi
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy; (C.S.); (G.C.)
| | - Giorgia Simonetti
- Biosciences Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) “Dino Amadori”, 47014 Meldola, Italy; (G.S.)
| | - Martina Pazzaglia
- Biosciences Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) “Dino Amadori”, 47014 Meldola, Italy; (G.S.)
| | - Francesco Paolo Cammarata
- Institute of Bioimaging and Molecular Physiology, National Council of Research (IBFM-CNR), 90015 Cefalù, Italy (G.R.)
- Laboratori Nazionali del SUD, National Institute of Nuclear Physics, (LNS-INFN), 95125 Catania, Italy (G.P.)
| | - Giorgio Russo
- Institute of Bioimaging and Molecular Physiology, National Council of Research (IBFM-CNR), 90015 Cefalù, Italy (G.R.)
- Laboratori Nazionali del SUD, National Institute of Nuclear Physics, (LNS-INFN), 95125 Catania, Italy (G.P.)
| | - Rosaria Acquaviva
- Department of Drug Science, Section of Biochemistry, University of Catania, 95125 Catania, Italy;
| | | | - Giada Petringa
- Laboratori Nazionali del SUD, National Institute of Nuclear Physics, (LNS-INFN), 95125 Catania, Italy (G.P.)
| | - Roberto Catalano
- Laboratori Nazionali del SUD, National Institute of Nuclear Physics, (LNS-INFN), 95125 Catania, Italy (G.P.)
| | - Valerio Cosimo Elia
- Department of Physics “E. Pancini”, University of Naples Federico II, 80126 Naples, Italy; (V.C.E.); (F.F.); (L.M.)
- National Institute of Nuclear Physics, Napoli Section (INFN NA), 80126 Naples, Italy
| | - Francesca Fede
- Department of Physics “E. Pancini”, University of Naples Federico II, 80126 Naples, Italy; (V.C.E.); (F.F.); (L.M.)
- National Institute of Nuclear Physics, Napoli Section (INFN NA), 80126 Naples, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Manti
- Department of Physics “E. Pancini”, University of Naples Federico II, 80126 Naples, Italy; (V.C.E.); (F.F.); (L.M.)
- National Institute of Nuclear Physics, Napoli Section (INFN NA), 80126 Naples, Italy
| | - Gastone Castellani
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy; (C.S.); (G.C.)
| | - Daniel Remondini
- National Institute for Nuclear Physics, Bologna Section (INFN BO), 40127 Bologna, Italy
- Department of Physics and Astronomy “Augusto Righi” (DIFA), Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy
| | - Isabella Zironi
- National Institute for Nuclear Physics, Bologna Section (INFN BO), 40127 Bologna, Italy
- Department of Physics and Astronomy “Augusto Righi” (DIFA), Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Alterio D, Vincini MG, Volpe S, Bergamaschi L, Zaffaroni M, Gandini S, Peruzzotti G, Cattani F, Garibaldi C, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Orecchia R. A multicenter high-quality data registry for advanced proton therapy approaches: the POWER registry. BMC Cancer 2024; 24:333. [PMID: 38475762 PMCID: PMC10935828 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12059-2] [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: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 02/26/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Paucity and low evidence-level data on proton therapy (PT) represent one of the main issues for the establishment of solid indications in the PT setting. Aim of the present registry, the POWER registry, is to provide a tool for systematic, prospective, harmonized, and multidimensional high-quality data collection to promote knowledge in the field of PT with a particular focus on the use of hypofractionation. METHODS All patients with any type of oncologic disease (benign and malignant disease) eligible for PT at the European Institute of Oncology (IEO), Milan, Italy, will be included in the present registry. Three levels of data collection will be implemented: Level (1) clinical research (patients outcome and toxicity, quality of life, and cost/effectiveness analysis); Level (2) radiological and radiobiological research (radiomic and dosiomic analysis, as well as biological modeling); Level (3) biological and translational research (biological biomarkers and genomic data analysis). Endpoints and outcome measures of hypofractionation schedules will be evaluated in terms of either Treatment Efficacy (tumor response rate, time to progression/percentages of survivors/median survival, clinical, biological, and radiological biomarkers changes, identified as surrogate endpoints of cancer survival/response to treatment) and Toxicity. The study protocol has been approved by the IEO Ethical Committee (IEO 1885). Other than patients treated at IEO, additional PT facilities (equipped with Proteus®ONE or Proteus®PLUS technologies by IBA, Ion Beam Applications, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium) are planned to join the registry data collection. Moreover, the registry will be also fully integrated into international PT data collection networks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Giulia Vincini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Luca Bergamaschi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Mattia Zaffaroni
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Sara Gandini
- Molecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Peruzzotti
- Clinical Trial Office, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Cattani
- Medical Physics Unit, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Cristina Garibaldi
- Unit of Radiation Research, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sioen S, Vanhove O, Vanderstraeten B, De Wagter C, Engelbrecht M, Vandevoorde C, De Kock E, Van Goethem MJ, Vral A, Baeyens A. Impact of proton therapy on the DNA damage induction and repair in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. Sci Rep 2023; 13:16995. [PMID: 37813904 PMCID: PMC10562436 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-42362-0] [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: 04/27/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 10/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy is of great interest to pediatric cancer patients because of its optimal depth dose distribution. In view of healthy tissue damage and the increased risk of secondary cancers, we investigated DNA damage induction and repair of radiosensitive hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) exposed to therapeutic proton and photon irradiation due to their role in radiation-induced leukemia. Human CD34+ HSPCs were exposed to 6 MV X-rays, mid- and distal spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) protons at doses ranging from 0.5 to 2 Gy. Persistent chromosomal damage was assessed with the micronucleus assay, while DNA damage induction and repair were analyzed with the γ-H2AX foci assay. No differences were found in induction and disappearance of γ-H2AX foci between 6 MV X-rays, mid- and distal SOBP protons at 1 Gy. A significantly higher number of micronuclei was found for distal SOBP protons compared to 6 MV X-rays and mid- SOBP protons at 0.5 and 1 Gy, while no significant differences in micronuclei were found at 2 Gy. In HSPCs, mid-SOBP protons are as damaging as conventional X-rays. Distal SOBP protons showed a higher number of micronuclei in HSPCs depending on the radiation dose, indicating possible changes of the in vivo biological response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simon Sioen
- Radiobiology, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Oniecha Vanhove
- Radiobiology, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Barbara Vanderstraeten
- Medical Physics, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Radiotherapy-Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Carlos De Wagter
- Medical Physics, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Radiotherapy-Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Monique Engelbrecht
- Separated Sector Cyclotron Laboratory, Radiation Biophysics Division, iThemba LABS (NRF), Cape Town, 7131, South Africa
| | - Charlot Vandevoorde
- Separated Sector Cyclotron Laboratory, Radiation Biophysics Division, iThemba LABS (NRF), Cape Town, 7131, South Africa
- Biophysics Department, GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Evan De Kock
- Separated Sector Cyclotron Laboratory, Radiation Biophysics Division, iThemba LABS (NRF), Cape Town, 7131, South Africa
| | - Marc-Jan Van Goethem
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Particle Therapy Research Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Anne Vral
- Radiobiology, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Ans Baeyens
- Radiobiology, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium
- Cancer Research Institute Ghent (CRIG), Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gaito S, Marvaso G, Ortiz R, Crellin A, Aznar MC, Indelicato DJ, Pan S, Whitfield G, Alongi F, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Burnet N, Li MP, Rothwell B, Smith E, Colaco RJ. Proton Beam Therapy in the Oligometastatic/Oligorecurrent Setting: Is There a Role? A Literature Review. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092489. [PMID: 37173955 PMCID: PMC10177340 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Revised: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/25/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with conventional photon radiotherapy (XRT) are well-established treatment options for selected patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease. The use of PBT for SABR-SRS is attractive given the property of a lack of exit dose. The aim of this review is to evaluate the role and current utilisation of PBT in the oligometastatic/oligorecurrent setting. METHODS Using Medline and Embase, a comprehensive literature review was conducted following the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes) criteria, which returned 83 records. After screening, 16 records were deemed to be relevant and included in the review. RESULTS Six of the sixteen records analysed originated in Japan, six in the USA, and four in Europe. The focus was oligometastatic disease in 12, oligorecurrence in 3, and both in 1. Most of the studies analysed (12/16) were retrospective cohorts or case reports, two were phase II clinical trials, one was a literature review, and one study discussed the pros and cons of PBT in these settings. The studies presented in this review included a total of 925 patients. The metastatic sites analysed in these articles were the liver (4/16), lungs (3/16), thoracic lymph nodes (2/16), bone (2/16), brain (1/16), pelvis (1/16), and various sites in 2/16. CONCLUSIONS PBT could represent an option for the treatment of oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease in patients with a low metastatic burden. Nevertheless, due to its limited availability, PBT has traditionally been funded for selected tumour indications that are defined as curable. The availability of new systemic therapies has widened this definition. This, together with the exponential growth of PBT capacity worldwide, will potentially redefine its commissioning to include selected patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease. To date, PBT has been used with encouraging results for the treatment of liver metastases. However, PBT could be an option in those cases in which the reduced radiation exposure to normal tissues leads to a clinically significant reduction in treatment-related toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20126 Milan, Italy
| | - Ramon Ortiz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94720, USA
| | - Adrian Crellin
- National Lead Proton Beam Therapy NHSe, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - Marianne C Aznar
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Daniel J Indelicato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32206, USA
| | - Shermaine Pan
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Gillian Whitfield
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore don Calabria, 37024 Verona, Italy
- Division of Radiology and Radiotherapy, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20126 Milan, Italy
| | - Neil Burnet
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Michelle P Li
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - Bethany Rothwell
- Division of Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Ed Smith
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Rovel J Colaco
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Helm A, Totis C, Durante M, Fournier C. Are charged particles a good match for combination with immunotherapy? Current knowledge and perspectives. INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF CELL AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY 2023; 376:1-36. [PMID: 36997266 DOI: 10.1016/bs.ircmb.2023.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
Abstract
Charged particle radiotherapy, mainly using protons and carbon ions, provides physical characteristics allowing for a volume conformal irradiation and a reduction of the integral dose to normal tissue. Carbon ion therapy additionally features an increased biological effectiveness resulting in peculiar molecular effects. Immunotherapy, mostly performed with immune checkpoint inhibitors, is nowadays considered a pillar in cancer therapy. Based on the advantageous features of charged particle radiotherapy, we review pre-clinical evidence revealing a strong potential of its combination with immunotherapy. We argue that the combination therapy deserves further investigation with the aim of translation in clinics, where a few studies have been set up already.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Helm
- Biophysics Department, GSI, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - C Totis
- Biophysics Department, GSI, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - M Durante
- Biophysics Department, GSI, Darmstadt, Germany.
| | - C Fournier
- Biophysics Department, GSI, Darmstadt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rothwell B, Lowe M, Traneus E, Krieger M, Schuemann J. Treatment planning considerations for the development of FLASH proton therapy. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:222-230. [PMID: 35963397 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Revised: 07/21/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
Abstract
With increasing focus on the translation of the observed FLASH effect into clinical practice, this paper presents treatment planning considerations for its development using proton therapy. Potential requirements to induce a FLASH effect are discussed along with the properties of existing proton therapy delivery systems and the changes in planning and delivery approaches required to satisfy these prerequisites. For the exploration of treatment planning approaches for FLASH, developments in treatment planning systems are needed. Flexibility in adapting to new information will be important in such an evolving area. Variations in definitions, threshold values and assumptions can make it difficult to compare different published studies and to interpret previous studies in the context of new information. Together with the fact that much is left to be understood about the underlying mechanism behind the FLASH effect, a systematic and comprehensive approach to information storage is encouraged. Collecting and retaining more detailed information on planned and realised dose delivery as well as reporting the assumptions made in planning studies creates the potential for research to be revisited and re-evaluated in the light of future improvements in understanding. Forward thinking at the time of study development can help facilitate retrospective analysis. This, we hope, will increase the available evidence and accelerate the translation of the FLASH effect into clinical benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bethany Rothwell
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
| | - Matthew Lowe
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom; Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | | | - Miriam Krieger
- Varian Medical Systems Particle Therapy GmbH & Co. KG, Troisdorf, Germany
| | - Jan Schuemann
- Division of Physics, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Impact of DNA Repair Kinetics and Dose Rate on RBE Predictions in the UNIVERSE. Int J Mol Sci 2022; 23:ijms23116268. [PMID: 35682947 PMCID: PMC9181644 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23116268] [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: 04/13/2022] [Revised: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 05/30/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Accurate knowledge of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and its dependencies is crucial to support modern ion beam therapy and its further development. However, the influence of different dose rates of the reference radiation and ion beam are rarely considered. The ion beam RBE-model within our "UNIfied and VERSatile bio response Engine" (UNIVERSE) is extended by including DNA damage repair kinetics to investigate the impact of dose-rate effects on the predicted RBE. It was found that dose-rate effects increase with dose and biological effects saturate at high dose-rates, which is consistent with data- and model-based studies in the literature. In a comparison with RBE measurements from a high dose in-vivo study, the predictions of the presented modification were found to be improved in comparison to the previous version of UNIVERSE and existing clinical approaches that disregard dose-rate effects. Consequently, DNA repair kinetics and the different dose rates applied by the reference and ion beams might need to be considered in biophysical models to accurately predict the RBE. Additionally, this study marks an important step in the further development of UNIVERSE, extending its capabilities in giving theoretical guidance to support progress in ion beam therapy.
Collapse
|
8
|
The Role of Hypofractionation in Proton Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14092271. [PMID: 35565400 PMCID: PMC9104796 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14092271] [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: 03/19/2022] [Revised: 04/22/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/07/2022] Open
Abstract
Hypofractionated radiotherapy is an attractive approach for minimizing patient burden and treatment cost. Technological advancements in external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) delivery and image guidance have resulted in improved targeting and conformality of the absorbed dose to the disease and a reduction in dose to healthy tissue. These advances in EBRT have led to an increasing adoption and interest in hypofractionation. Furthermore, for many treatment sites, proton beam therapy (PBT) provides an improved absorbed dose distribution compared to X-ray (photon) EBRT. In the past 10 years there has been a notable increase in reported clinical data involving hypofractionation with PBT, reflecting the interest in this treatment approach. This review will discuss the reported clinical data and radiobiology of hypofractionated PBT. Over 50 published manuscripts reporting clinical results involving hypofractionation and PBT were included in this review, ~90% of which were published since 2010. The most common treatment regions reported were prostate, lung and liver, making over 70% of the reported results. Many of the reported clinical data indicate that hypofractionated PBT can be well tolerated, however future clinical trials are still needed to determine the optimal fractionation regime.
Collapse
|
9
|
Huijskens SC, Kroon PS, Gaze MN, Gandola L, Bolle S, Supiot S, Abakay CD, Alexopoulou A, Bokun J, Chojnacka M, Escande A, Giralt J, Harrabi S, Maduro JH, Mandeville H, Mussano A, Napieralska A, Padovani L, Scarzello G, Timmermann B, Claude L, Seravalli E, Janssens GO. Radical radiotherapy for paediatric solid tumour metastases: An overview of current European protocols and outcomes of a SIOPE multicenter survey. Eur J Cancer 2021; 145:121-131. [PMID: 33461061 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2020] [Revised: 10/22/2020] [Accepted: 12/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE About 20% of children with solid tumours (ST) present with distant metastases (DM). Evidence regarding the use of radical radiotherapy of these DM is sparse and open for personal interpretation. The aim of this survey was to review European protocols and to map current practice regarding the irradiation of DM across SIOPE-affiliated countries. MATERIALS/METHODS Radiotherapy guidelines for metastatic sites (bone, brain, distant lymph nodes, lung and liver) in eight European protocols for rhabdomyosarcoma, non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft-tissue sarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, neuroblastoma and renal tumours were reviewed. SIOPE centres irradiating ≥50 children annually were invited to participate in an online survey. RESULTS Radiotherapy to at least one metastatic site was recommended in all protocols, except for high-risk neuroblastoma. Per protocol, dose prescription varied per site, and information on delineation and treatment planning/delivery was generally missing. Between July and September 2019, 20/27 centres completed the survey. Around 14% of patients were deemed to have DM from ST at diagnosis, of which half were treated with curative intent. A clear cut-off for a maximum number of DM was not used in half of the centres. Regardless of the tumour type and site, conventional radiotherapy regimens were most commonly used to treat DM. When stereotactic radiotherapy was used, a wide range of fractionation regimens were applied. CONCLUSION Current radiotherapy guidelines for DM do not allow a consistent approach in a multicentre setting. Prospective (randomised) trials are needed to define the role of radical irradiation of DM from paediatric ST.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie C Huijskens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Petra S Kroon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Mark N Gaze
- Department of Oncology, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Lorenza Gandola
- Paediatric Radiotherapy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Stephanie Bolle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Stephane Supiot
- Oncologie Radiotherapie, Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Nantes, France
| | - Candan D Abakay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey
| | | | - Jelena Bokun
- Institute of Oncology and Radiology of Serbia, Belgrado, Serbia
| | - Marzanna Chojnacka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center-Institute, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Alexandre Escande
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oscar Lambret Comprehensive Cancer Center, Lille, France
| | - Jordi Giralt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Semi Harrabi
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Radiotherapy, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - John H Maduro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen/Groningen Proton Center, Groningen, The Netherlands; Princess Máxima Center for Paediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Anna Mussano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Citta della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy
| | - Aleksandra Napieralska
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology Gliwice Branch, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Laetitia Padovani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Marseille, France
| | - Giovanni Scarzello
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Veneto Institute of Oncology, Padua, Italy
| | - Beate Timmermann
- Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Line Claude
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France
| | - Enrica Seravalli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geert O Janssens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Princess Máxima Center for Paediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
De Marzi L, Patriarca A, Scher N, Thariat J, Vidal M. Exploiting the full potential of proton therapy: An update on the specifics and innovations towards spatial or temporal optimisation of dose delivery. Cancer Radiother 2020; 24:691-698. [PMID: 32753235 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2020.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2020] [Revised: 06/07/2020] [Accepted: 06/09/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Prescription and delivery of protons are somewhat different compared to photons and may influence outcomes (tumour control and toxicity). These differences should be taken into account to fully exploit the clinical potential of proton therapy. Innovations in proton therapy treatment are also required to widen the therapeutic window and determine appropriate populations of patients that would benefit from new treatments. Therefore, strategies are now being developed to reduce side effects to critical normal tissues using alternative treatment configurations and new spatial or temporal-driven optimisation approaches. Indeed, spatiotemporal optimisation (based on flash, proton minibeam radiation therapy or hypofractionated delivery methods) has been gaining some attention in proton therapy as a mean of improving (biological and physical) dose distribution. In this short review, the main differences in planning and delivery between protons and photons, as well as some of the latest developments and methodological issues (in silico modelling) related to providing scientific evidence for these new techniques will be discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L De Marzi
- Institut Curie, centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Université PSL (Paris Sciences & Lettres), 60, rue Mazarine, 75006 Paris, France; Université Paris-Saclay, route de l'Orme-aux-Merisiers, RD 128, 91190 Saint-Aubin, France; Inserm U1021, centre universitaire, bâtiment 110, rue Henri-Becquerel, 91405 Orsay cedex, France; CNRS, UMR 3347, centre universitaire, bâtiment 110, rue Henri-Becquerel, 91405 Orsay cedex, France.
| | - A Patriarca
- Institut Curie, centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Université PSL (Paris Sciences & Lettres), 60, rue Mazarine, 75006 Paris, France
| | - N Scher
- Institut Curie, centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Université PSL (Paris Sciences & Lettres), 60, rue Mazarine, 75006 Paris, France
| | - J Thariat
- Service de radiothérapie oncologique, centre François-Baclesse, 3, avenue General-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Laboratoire de physique corpusculaire de Caen, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; Institut national de physique nucléaire et physique des particules (IN2P3), 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; EnsiCaen, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; CNRS, UMR6534, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; Unicaen, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; Normandie Université, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France
| | - M Vidal
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Held KD, Lomax AJ, Troost EGC. Proton therapy special feature: introductory editorial. Br J Radiol 2020; 93:20209004. [PMID: 32081045 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20209004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn D Held
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Antony J Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland.,Department of Physics, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Esther G C Troost
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|