PURPOSE: To demonstrate the computed tomography, conformal irradiation, and treatment planning capabilities of a small animal radiation research platform (SARRP). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The SARRP uses a dual-focal spot, constant voltage X-ray source mounted on a gantry with a source-to-isocenter distance of 35 cm. Gantry rotation is limited to 120 degrees from vertical. X-rays of 80-100 kVp from the smaller 0.4-mm focal spot are used for imaging. Both 0.4-mm and 3.0-mm focal spots operate at 225 kVp for irradiation. Robotic translate/rotate stages are used to position the animal. Cone-beam computed tomography is achieved by rotating the horizontal animal between the stationary X-ray source and a flat-panel detector. The radiation beams range from 0.5 mm in diameter to 60 x 60 mm(2). Dosimetry is measured with radiochromic films. Monte Carlo dose calculations are used for treatment planning. The combination of gantry and robotic stage motions facilitate conformal irradiation. RESULTS: The SARRP spans 3 ft x 4 ft x 6 ft (width x length x height). Depending on the filtration, the isocenter dose outputs at a 1-cm depth in water were 22-375 cGy/min from the smallest to the largest radiation fields. The 20-80% dose falloff spanned 0.16 mm. Cone-beam computed tomography with 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 mm(3) voxel resolution was acquired with a dose of <1 cGy. Treatment planning was performed at submillimeter resolution. CONCLUSION: The capability of the SARRP to deliver highly focal beams to multiple animal model systems provides new research opportunities that more realistically bridge laboratory research and clinical translation.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the computed tomography, conformal irradiation, and treatment planning capabilities of a small animal radiation research platform (SARRP). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The SARRP uses a dual-focal spot, constant voltage X-ray source mounted on a gantry with a source-to-isocenter distance of 35 cm. Gantry rotation is limited to 120 degrees from vertical. X-rays of 80-100 kVp from the smaller 0.4-mm focal spot are used for imaging. Both 0.4-mm and 3.0-mm focal spots operate at 225 kVp for irradiation. Robotic translate/rotate stages are used to position the animal. Cone-beam computed tomography is achieved by rotating the horizontal animal between the stationary X-ray source and a flat-panel detector. The radiation beams range from 0.5 mm in diameter to 60 x 60 mm(2). Dosimetry is measured with radiochromic films. Monte Carlo dose calculations are used for treatment planning. The combination of gantry and robotic stage motions facilitate conformal irradiation. RESULTS: The SARRP spans 3 ft x 4 ft x 6 ft (width x length x height). Depending on the filtration, the isocenter dose outputs at a 1-cm depth in water were 22-375 cGy/min from the smallest to the largest radiation fields. The 20-80% dose falloff spanned 0.16 mm. Cone-beam computed tomography with 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 mm(3) voxel resolution was acquired with a dose of <1 cGy. Treatment planning was performed at submillimeter resolution. CONCLUSION: The capability of the SARRP to deliver highly focal beams to multiple animal model systems provides new research opportunities that more realistically bridge laboratory research and clinical translation.
Authors: Slobodan Devic; Jan Seuntjens; Edwin Sham; Ervin B Podgorsak; C Ross Schmidtlein; Assen S Kirov; Christopher G Soares Journal: Med Phys Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Hua Deng; Christopher W Kennedy; Elwood Armour; Erik Tryggestad; Eric Ford; Todd McNutt; Licai Jiang; John Wong Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2007-04-26 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Collins A Karikari; Indrajit Roy; Eric Tryggestad; Georg Feldmann; Clemencia Pinilla; Kate Welsh; John C Reed; Elwood P Armour; John Wong; Joseph Herman; Dinesh Rakheja; Anirban Maitra Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2007-03-05 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Spencer J Collis; Sara Neutzel; Travis L Thompson; Michael J Swartz; Larry E Dillehay; Michael I Collector; Saul J Sharkis; Theodore L DeWeese Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Colleen DesRosiers; Marc S Mendonca; Craig Tyree; Vadim Moskvin; Morris Bank; Leo Massaro; Robert M Bigsby; Andrea Caperall-Grant; Shailaja Valluri; Joseph R Dynlacht; Robert Timmerman Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2003-10
Authors: Adam L Green; Shakti H Ramkissoon; Dilara McCauley; Kristen Jones; Jennifer A Perry; Jessie Hao-Ru Hsu; Lori A Ramkissoon; Cecile L Maire; Benjamin Hubbell-Engler; David S Knoff; Sharon Shacham; Keith L Ligon; Andrew L Kung Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-11-02 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Rachel E McCarroll; Ashley E Rubinstein; Charles V Kingsley; Jinzhong Yang; Peiying Yang; Laurence E Court Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Sunil Sharma; Ganesh Narayanasamy; Beata Przybyla; Jessica Webber; Marjan Boerma; Richard Clarkson; Eduardo G Moros; Peter M Corry; Robert J Griffin Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-07-08
Authors: Gregory N Gan; Cem Altunbas; John J Morton; Justin Eagles; Jennifer Backus; Wayne Dzingle; David Raben; Antonio Jimeno Journal: Int J Radiat Biol Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 2.694
Authors: Yidong Yang; Ken Kang-Hsin Wang; Sohrab Eslami; Iulian I Iordachita; Michael S Patterson; John W Wong Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Lei Zhang; Hong Yuan; Laurel M Burk; Christy R Inscoe; Michael J Hadsell; Pavel Chtcheprov; Yueh Z Lee; Jianping Lu; Sha Chang; Otto Zhou Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 3.609