OBJECTIVES: Microbeam radiotherapy (MRT) with wafers of microscopically narrow, synchrotron generated X-rays is being used for pre-clinical cancer trials in animal models. It has been shown that high dose MRT can be effective at destroying tumours in animal models, while causing unexpectedly little damage to normal tissue. The aim of this study was to use a dermatopathological scoring system to quantify and compare the acute biological response of normal mouse skin with microplanar and broad-beam (BB) radiation as a basis for biological dosimetry. METHOD: The skin flaps of three groups of mice were irradiated with high entrance doses (200 Gy, 400 Gy and 800 Gy) of MRT and BB and low dose BB (11 Gy, 22 Gy and 44 Gy). The mice were culled at different time-points post-irradiation. Skin sections were evaluated histologically using the following parameters: epidermal cell death, nuclear enlargement, spongiosis, hair follicle damage and dermal inflammation. The fields of irradiation were identified by γH2AX-positive immunostaining. RESULTS: The acute radiation damage in skin from high dose MRT was significantly lower than from high dose BB and, importantly, similar to low dose BB. CONCLUSION: The integrated MRT dose was more relevant than the peak or valley dose when comparing with BB fields. In MRT-treated skin, the apoptotic cells of epidermis and hair follicles were not confined to the microbeam paths.
OBJECTIVES: Microbeam radiotherapy (MRT) with wafers of microscopically narrow, synchrotron generated X-rays is being used for pre-clinical cancer trials in animal models. It has been shown that high dose MRT can be effective at destroying tumours in animal models, while causing unexpectedly little damage to normal tissue. The aim of this study was to use a dermatopathological scoring system to quantify and compare the acute biological response of normal mouse skin with microplanar and broad-beam (BB) radiation as a basis for biological dosimetry. METHOD: The skin flaps of three groups of mice were irradiated with high entrance doses (200 Gy, 400 Gy and 800 Gy) of MRT and BB and low dose BB (11 Gy, 22 Gy and 44 Gy). The mice were culled at different time-points post-irradiation. Skin sections were evaluated histologically using the following parameters: epidermal cell death, nuclear enlargement, spongiosis, hair follicle damage and dermal inflammation. The fields of irradiation were identified by γH2AX-positive immunostaining. RESULTS: The acute radiation damage in skin from high dose MRT was significantly lower than from high dose BB and, importantly, similar to low dose BB. CONCLUSION: The integrated MRT dose was more relevant than the peak or valley dose when comparing with BB fields. In MRT-treated skin, the apoptotic cells of epidermis and hair follicles were not confined to the microbeam paths.
Authors: F Avraham Dilmanian; Terry M Button; Géraldine Le Duc; Nan Zhong; Louis A Peña; Jennifer A L Smith; Steve R Martinez; Tigran Bacarian; Jennifer Tammam; Baorui Ren; Peter M Farmer; John Kalef-Ezra; Peggy L Micca; Marta M Nawrocky; James A Niederer; F Peter Recksiek; Alexander Fuchs; Eliot M Rosen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: F Avraham Dilmanian; Gerard M Morris; Nan Zhong; Tigran Bacarian; James F Hainfeld; John Kalef-Ezra; Laura J Brewington; Jennifer Tammam; Eliot M Rosen Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: J A Laissue; G Geiser; P O Spanne; F A Dilmanian; J O Gebbers; M Geiser; X Y Wu; M S Makar; P L Micca; M M Nawrocky; D D Joel; D N Slatkin Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1998-11-23 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: F A Dilmanian; J Kalef-Ezra; M J Petersen; G Bozios; J Vosswinkel; F Giron; B Ren; R Yakupov; G Antonakopoulos Journal: Cardiovasc Radiat Med Date: 2003 Jul-Sep
Authors: Hong Yuan; Lei Zhang; Jonathan E Frank; Christina R Inscoe; Laurel M Burk; Mike Hadsell; Yueh Z Lee; Jianping Lu; Sha Chang; Otto Zhou Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2015-08-25 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Cristian Fernandez-Palomo; Carmel Mothersill; Elke Bräuer-Krisch; Jean Laissue; Colin Seymour; Elisabeth Schültke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Soha Bazyar; Christina R Inscoe; Thad Benefield; Lei Zhang; Jianping Lu; Otto Zhou; Yueh Z Lee Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-08-11 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Ghulam Muhammad; Jiadi Xu; Jeff W M Bulte; Anna Jablonska; Piotr Walczak; Miroslaw Janowski Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Judith N Rivera; Thomas M Kierski; Sandeep K Kasoji; Anthony S Abrantes; Paul A Dayton; Sha X Chang Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mohammad Johari Ibahim; Jeffrey C Crosbie; Yuqing Yang; Marina Zaitseva; Andrew W Stevenson; Peter A W Rogers; Premila Paiva Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lloyd M L Smyth; Jacqueline F Donoghue; Jessica A Ventura; Jayde Livingstone; Tracy Bailey; Liam R J Day; Jeffrey C Crosbie; Peter A W Rogers Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 4.379