Biological response in vitro to pulsed high dose rate electrons from a clinical accelerator

Comment on 'Modeling for predicting survival fraction of cells after ultra-high dose rate irradiation'

We comment on the recently published study 'Modeling for predicting survival fraction of cells after ultra-high dose rate irradiation' by Shiraishiet al. While the general approach of the study may be appropriate, we wish to comment on its limitations and point out issues concerning their choice of the benchmarking and fitting data. The approach by the authors could become viable in an extended form once more comprehensive data is available.

Possible mechanisms and simulation modeling of FLASH radiotherapy

FLASH radiotherapy (FLASH-RT) has great potential to improve patient outcomes. It delivers radiation doses at an ultra-high dose rate (UHDR: ≥ 40 Gy/s) in a single instant or a few pulses. Much higher irradiation doses can be administered to tumors with FLASH-RT than with conventional dose rate (0.01-0.40 Gy/s) radiotherapy. UHDR irradiation can suppress toxicity in normal tissues while sustaining antitumor efficiency, which is referred to as the FLASH effect. However, the mechanisms underlying the effects of the FLASH remain unclear. To clarify these mechanisms, the development of simulation models that can contribute to treatment planning for FLASH-RT is still underway. Previous studies indicated that transient oxygen depletion or augmented reactions between secondary reactive species produced by irradiation may be involved in this process. To discuss the possible mechanisms of the FLASH effect and its clinical potential, we summarized the physicochemical, chemical, and biological perspectives as well as the development of simulation modeling for FLASH-RT.

Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Bragg Peak Conformal FLASH in Prostate Cancer Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Bragg peak FLASH radiotherapy (RT) uses a distal tracking method to eliminate exit doses and can achieve superior OAR sparing. This study explores the application of this novel method in stereotactic body radiotherapy prostate FLASH-RT. An in-house platform was developed to enable intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning using a single-energy Bragg peak distal tracking method. The patients involved in the study were previously treated with proton stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the pencil beam scanning (PBS) technique to 40 Gy in five fractions. FLASH plans were optimized using a four-beam arrangement to generate a dose distribution similar to the conventional opposing beams. All of the beams had a small angle of two degrees from the lateral direction to increase the dosimetry quality. Dose metrics were compared between the conventional PBS and the Bragg peak FLASH plans. The dose rate histogram (DRVH) and FLASH metrics of 40 Gy/s coverage (V40Gy/s) were investigated for the Bragg peak plans. There was no significant difference between the clinical and Bragg peak plans in rectum, bladder, femur heads, large bowel, and penile bulb dose metrics, except for Dmax. For the CTV, the FLASH plans resulted in a higher Dmax than the clinical plans (116.9% vs. 103.3%). For the rectum, the V40Gy/s reached 94% and 93% for 1 Gy dose thresholds in composite and single-field evaluations, respectively. Additionally, the FLASH ratio reached close to 100% after the application of the 5 Gy threshold in composite dose rate assessment. In conclusion, the Bragg peak distal tracking method can yield comparable plan quality in most OARs while preserving sufficient FLASH dose rate coverage, demonstrating that the ultra-high dose technique can be applied in prostate FLASH SBRT.

FLASH Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Symptomatic Bone Metastases (FAST-01): Protocol for the First Prospective Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

In preclinical studies, FLASH therapy, in which radiation delivered at ultrahigh dose rates of ≥40 Gy per second, has been shown to cause less injury to normal tissues than radiotherapy delivered at conventional dose rates. This paper describes the protocol for the first-in-human clinical investigation of proton FLASH therapy.

OBJECTIVE

FAST-01 is a prospective, single-center trial designed to assess the workflow feasibility, toxicity, and efficacy of FLASH therapy for the treatment of painful bone metastases in the extremities.

METHODS

Following informed consent, 10 subjects aged ≥18 years with up to 3 painful bone metastases in the extremities (excluding the feet, hands, and wrists) will be enrolled. A treatment field selected from a predefined library of plans with fixed field sizes (from 7.5 cm × 7.5 cm up to 7.5 cm × 20 cm) will be used for treatment. Subjects will receive 8 Gy of radiation in a single fraction-a well-established palliative regimen evaluated in prior investigations using conventional dose rate photon radiotherapy. A FLASH-enabled Varian ProBeam proton therapy unit will be used to deliver treatment to the target volume at a dose rate of ≥40 Gy per second, using the plateau (transmission) portion of the proton beam. After treatment, subjects will be assessed for pain response as well as any adverse effects of FLASH radiation. The primary end points include assessing the workflow feasibility and toxicity of FLASH treatment. The secondary end point is pain response at the treated site(s), as measured by patient-reported pain scores, the use of pain medication, and any flare in bone pain after treatment. The results will be compared to those reported historically for conventional dose rate photon radiotherapy, using the same radiation dose and fractionation.

RESULTS

FAST-01 opened to enrollment on November 3, 2020. Initial results are expected to be published in 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this investigation will contribute to further developing and optimizing the FLASH-enabled ProBeam proton therapy system workflow. The pain response and toxicity data acquired in our study will provide a greater understanding of FLASH treatment effects on tumor responses and normal tissue toxicities, and they will inform future FLASH trial designs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04592887; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04592887.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/41812.

Radiobiology of the FLASH effect

Radiation exposures at ultrahigh dose rates (UHDRs) at several orders of magnitude greater than in current clinical radiotherapy (RT) have been shown to manifest differential radiobiological responses compared to conventional (CONV) dose rates. This has led to studies investigating the application of UHDR for therapeutic advantage (FLASH-RT) that have gained significant interest since the initial discovery in 2014 that demonstrated reduced lung toxicity with equivalent levels of tumor control compared with conventional dose-rate RT. Many subsequent studies have demonstrated the potential protective role of FLASH-RT in normal tissues, yet the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms of the FLASH effect remain to be fully elucidated. Here, we summarize the current evidence of the FLASH effect and review FLASH-RT studies performed in preclinical models of normal tissue response. To critically examine the underlying biological mechanisms of responses to UHDR radiation exposures, we evaluate in vitro studies performed with normal and tumor cells. Differential responses to UHDR versus CONV irradiation recurrently involve reduced inflammatory processes and differential expression of pro- and anti-inflammatory genes. In addition, frequently reduced levels of DNA damage or misrepair products are seen after UHDR irradiation. So far, it is not clear what signal elicits these differential responses, but there are indications for involvement of reactive species. Different susceptibility to FLASH effects observed between normal and tumor cells may result from altered metabolic and detoxification pathways and/or repair pathways used by tumor cells. We summarize the current theories that may explain the FLASH effect and highlight important research questions that are key to a better mechanistic understanding and, thus, the future implementation of FLASH-RT in the clinic.

In vitro assays for investigating the FLASH effect

FLASH radiotherapy is a novel technique that has been shown in numerous preclinical in vivo studies to have the potential to be the next important improvement in cancer treatment. However, the biological mechanisms responsible for the selective FLASH sparing effect of normal tissues are not yet known. An optimal translation of FLASH radiotherapy into the clinic would require a good understanding of the specific beam parameters that induces a FLASH effect, environmental conditions affecting the response, and the radiobiological mechanisms involved. Even though the FLASH effect has generally been considered as an in vivo effect, studies finding these answers would be difficult and ethically challenging to carry out solely in animals. Hence, suitable in vitro studies aimed towards finding these answers are needed. In this review, we describe and summarise several in vitro assays that have been used or could be used to finally elucidate the mechanisms behind the FLASH effect.

Cancer Cells Can Exhibit a Sparing FLASH Effect at Low Doses Under Normoxic In Vitro-Conditions

Background

Irradiation with ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) has been shown to spare normal tissue without hampering tumor control in several in vivo studies. Few cell lines have been investigated in vitro, and previous results are inconsistent. Assuming that oxygen depletion accounts for the FLASH sparing effect, no sparing should appear for cells irradiated with low doses in normoxia.

Methods

Seven cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-231, MCF7, WiDr, LU-HNSCC4, HeLa [early passage and subclone]) and normal lung fibroblasts (MRC-5) were irradiated with doses ranging from 0 to 12 Gy using FLASH (≥800 Gy/s) or conventional dose rates (CONV, 14 Gy/min), with a 10 MeV electron beam from a clinical linear accelerator. Surviving fraction (SF) was determined with clonogenic assays. Three cell lines were further studied for radiation-induced DNA-damage foci using a 53BP1-marker and for cell cycle synchronization after irradiation.

Results

A tendency of increased survival following FLASH compared with CONV was suggested for all cell lines, with significant differences for 4/7 cell lines. The magnitude of the FLASH-sparing expressed as a dose-modifying factor at SF=0.1 was around 1.1 for 6/7 cell lines and around 1.3 for the HeLa_subclone. Similar cell cycle distributions and 53BP1-foci numbers were found comparing FLASH to CONV.

Conclusion

We have found a FLASH effect appearing at low doses under normoxic conditions for several cell lines in vitro. The magnitude of the FLASH effect differed between the cell lines, suggesting inherited biological susceptibilities for FLASH irradiation.

FLASH and minibeams in radiation therapy: the effect of microstructures on time and space and their potential application to protontherapy

After years of lethargy, studies on two non-conventional microstructures in time and space of the beams used in radiation therapy are enjoying a huge revival. The first effect called “FLASH” is based on very high dose-rate irradiation (pulse amplitude ≥10⁶ Gy/s), short beam-on times (≤100 ms) and large single doses (≥10 Gy) as experimental parameters established so far to give biological and potential clinical effects. The second effect relies on the use of arrays of minibeams (e.g., 0.5–1 mm, spaced 1–3.5 mm). Both approaches have been shown to protect healthy tissues as an endpoint that must be clearly specified and could be combined with each other (e.g., minibeams under FLASH conditions). FLASH depends on the presence of oxygen and could proceed from the chemistry of peroxyradicals and a reduced incidence on DNA and membrane damage. Minibeams action could be based on abscopal effects, cell signalling and/or migration of cells between “valleys and hills” present in the non-uniform irradiation field as well as faster repair of vascular damage. Both effects are expected to maintain intact the tumour control probability and might even preserve antitumoural immunological reactions. FLASH in vivo experiments involving Zebrafish, mice, pig and cats have been done with electron beams, while minibeams are an intermediate approach between X-GRID and synchrotron X-ray microbeams radiation. Both have an excellent rationale to converge and be applied with proton beams, combining focusing properties and high dose rates in the beam path of pencil beams, and the inherent advantage of a controlled limited range. A first treatment with electron FLASH (cutaneous lymphoma) has recently been achieved, but clinical trials have neither been presented for FLASH with protons, nor under the minibeam conditions. Better understanding of physical, chemical and biological mechanisms of both effects is essential to optimize the technical developments and devise clinical trials.

The FLASH effect depends on oxygen concentration

OBJECTIVE

Recent in vivo results have shown prominent tissue sparing effect of radiotherapy with ultra-high dose rates (FLASH) compared to conventional dose rates (CONV). Oxygen depletion has been proposed as the underlying mechanism, but in vitro data to support this have been lacking. The aim of the current study was to compare FLASH to CONV irradiation under different oxygen concentrations in vitro.

METHODS

Prostate cancer cells were irradiated at different oxygen concentrations (relative partial pressure ranging between 1.6 and 20%) with a 10 MeV electron beam at a dose rate of either 600 Gy/s (FLASH) or 14 Gy/min (CONV), using a modified clinical linear accelerator. We evaluated the surviving fraction of cells using clonogenic assays after irradiation with doses ranging from 0 to 25 Gy.

RESULTS

Under normoxic conditions, no differences between FLASH and CONV irradiation were found. For hypoxic cells (1.6%), the radiation response was similar up to a dose of about 5-10 Gy, above which increased survival was shown for FLASH compared to CONV irradiation. The increased survival was shown to be significant at 18 Gy, and the effect was shown to depend on oxygen concentration.

CONCLUSION

The in vitro FLASH effect depends on oxygen concentration. Further studies to characterize and optimize the use of FLASH in order to widen the therapeutic window are indicated.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This paper shows in vitro evidence for the role of oxygen concentration underlying the difference between FLASH and CONV irradiation.

Ultrahigh dose-rate FLASH irradiation increases the differential response between normal and tumor tissue in mice

In vitro studies suggested that sub-millisecond pulses of radiation elicit less genomic instability than continuous, protracted irradiation at the same total dose. To determine the potential of ultrahigh dose-rate irradiation in radiotherapy, we investigated lung fibrogenesis in C57BL/6J mice exposed either to short pulses (≤ 500 ms) of radiation delivered at ultrahigh dose rate (≥ 40 Gy/s, FLASH) or to conventional dose-rate irradiation (≤ 0.03 Gy/s, CONV) in single doses. The growth of human HBCx-12A and HEp-2 tumor xenografts in nude mice and syngeneic TC-1 Luc(+) orthotopic lung tumors in C57BL/6J mice was monitored under similar radiation conditions. CONV (15 Gy) triggered lung fibrosis associated with activation of the TGF-β (transforming growth factor-β) cascade, whereas no complications developed after doses of FLASH below 20 Gy for more than 36 weeks after irradiation. FLASH irradiation also spared normal smooth muscle and epithelial cells from acute radiation-induced apoptosis, which could be reinduced by administration of systemic TNF-α (tumor necrosis factor-α) before irradiation. In contrast, FLASH was as efficient as CONV in the repression of tumor growth. Together, these results suggest that FLASH radiotherapy might allow complete eradication of lung tumors and reduce the occurrence and severity of early and late complications affecting normal tissue.