Literature DB >> 24320424

Physical and biological factors determining the effective proton range.

Rebecca Grün1, Thomas Friedrich, Michael Krämer, Klemens Zink, Marco Durante, Rita Engenhart-Cabillic, Michael Scholz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Proton radiotherapy is rapidly becoming a standard treatment option for cancer. However, even though experimental data show an increase of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) with depth, particularly at the distal end of the treatment field, a generic RBE of 1.1 is currently used in proton radiotherapy. This discrepancy might affect the effective penetration depth of the proton beam and thus the dose to the surrounding tissue and organs at risk. The purpose of this study was thus to analyze the impact of a tissue and dose dependent RBE of protons on the effective range of the proton beam in comparison to the range based on a generic RBE of 1.1.
METHODS: Factors influencing the biologically effective proton range were systematically analyzed by means of treatment planning studies using the Local Effect Model (LEM IV) and the treatment planning software TRiP98. Special emphasis was put on the comparison of passive and active range modulation techniques.
RESULTS: Beam energy, tissue type, and dose level significantly affected the biological extension of the treatment field at the distal edge. Up to 4 mm increased penetration depth as compared to the depth based on a constant RBE of 1.1. The extension of the biologically effective range strongly depends on the initial proton energy used for the most distal layer of the field and correlates with the width of the distal penumbra. Thus, the range extension, in general, was more pronounced for passive as compared to active range modulation systems, whereas the maximum RBE was higher for active systems.
CONCLUSIONS: The analysis showed that the physical characteristics of the proton beam in terms of the width of the distal penumbra have a great impact on the RBE gradient and thus also the biologically effective penetration depth of the beam.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24320424     DOI: 10.1118/1.4824321

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  12 in total

Review 1.  New challenges in high-energy particle radiobiology.

Authors:  M Durante
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Proton RBE dependence on dose in the setting of hypofractionation.

Authors:  Thomas Friedrich
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  A phenomenological relative biological effectiveness (RBE) model for proton therapy based on all published in vitro cell survival data.

Authors:  Aimee L McNamara; Jan Schuemann; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  New Ions for Therapy.

Authors:  Francesco Tommasino; Emanuele Scifoni; Marco Durante
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2016-02-09

Review 5.  Proton radiobiology.

Authors:  Francesco Tommasino; Marco Durante
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  Induction and Processing of the Radiation-Induced Gamma-H2AX Signal and Its Link to the Underlying Pattern of DSB: A Combined Experimental and Modelling Study.

Authors:  Francesco Tommasino; Thomas Friedrich; Burkhard Jakob; Barbara Meyer; Marco Durante; Michael Scholz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Dosimetric impact of number of treatment fields in uniform scanning proton therapy planning of lung cancer.

Authors:  Suresh Rana; Hilarie Simpson; Gary Larson; Yuanshui Zheng
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2014-10

8.  Hypofractionated high-energy proton-beam irradiation is an alternative treatment for WHO grade I meningiomas.

Authors:  Pavlos Vlachogiannis; Olafur Gudjonsson; Anders Montelius; Erik Grusell; Ulf Isacsson; Kristina Nilsson; Erik Blomquist
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 2.216

9.  Variable RBE in proton therapy: comparison of different model predictions and their influence on clinical-like scenarios.

Authors:  Giulia Giovannini; Till Böhlen; Gonzalo Cabal; Julia Bauer; Thomas Tessonnier; Kathrin Frey; Jürgen Debus; Andrea Mairani; Katia Parodi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 3.481

Review 10.  Compton Camera and Prompt Gamma Ray Timing: Two Methods for In Vivo Range Assessment in Proton Therapy.

Authors:  Fernando Hueso-González; Fine Fiedler; Christian Golnik; Thomas Kormoll; Guntram Pausch; Johannes Petzoldt; Katja E Römer; Wolfgang Enghardt
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.