Literature DB >> 31010709

An integrated physico-chemical approach for explaining the differential impact of FLASH versus conventional dose rate irradiation on cancer and normal tissue responses.

Douglas R Spitz1, Garry R Buettner2, Michael S Petronek2, Joël J St-Aubin2, Ryan T Flynn2, Timothy J Waldron2, Charles L Limoli3.   

Abstract

For decades the field of radiation oncology has sought to improve the therapeutic ratio through innovations in physics, chemistry, and biology. To date, technological advancements in image guided beam delivery techniques have provided clinicians with their best options for improving this critical tool in cancer care. Medical physics has focused on the preferential targeting of tumors while minimizing the collateral dose to the surrounding normal tissues, yielding only incremental progress. However, recent developments involving ultra-high dose rate irradiation termed FLASH radiotherapy (FLASH-RT), that were initiated nearly 50 years ago, have stimulated a renaissance in the field of radiotherapy, long awaiting a breakthrough modality able to enhance therapeutic responses and limit normal tissue injury. Compared to conventional dose rates used clinically (0.1-0.2 Gy/s), FLASH can implement dose rates of electrons or X-rays in excess of 100 Gy/s. The implications of this ultra-fast delivery of dose are significant and need to be re-evaluated to appreciate the fundamental aspects underlying this seemingly unique radiobiology. The capability of FLASH to significantly spare normal tissue complications in multiple animal models, when compared to conventional rates of dose-delivery, while maintaining persistent growth inhibition of select tumor models has generated considerable excitement, as well as skepticism. Based on fundamental principles of radiation physics, radio-chemistry, and tumor vs. normal cell redox metabolism, this article presents a series of testable, biologically relevant hypotheses, which may help rationalize the differential effects of FLASH irradiation observed between normal tissue and tumors.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FLASH radiation; Free radical chemistry; Organic hydroperoxides; Oxygen; Redox active iron; Tumor versus normal tissue responses

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31010709      PMCID: PMC6761031          DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.03.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  33 in total

Review 1.  Metabolic oxidation/reduction reactions and cellular responses to ionizing radiation: a unifying concept in stress response biology.

Authors:  Douglas R Spitz; Edouard I Azzam; Jian Jian Li; David Gius
Journal:  Cancer Metastasis Rev       Date:  2004 Aug-Dec       Impact factor: 9.264

2.  O2⋅- and H2O2-Mediated Disruption of Fe Metabolism Causes the Differential Susceptibility of NSCLC and GBM Cancer Cells to Pharmacological Ascorbate.

Authors:  Joshua D Schoenfeld; Zita A Sibenaller; Kranti A Mapuskar; Brett A Wagner; Kimberly L Cramer-Morales; Muhammad Furqan; Sonia Sandhu; Thomas L Carlisle; Mark C Smith; Taher Abu Hejleh; Daniel J Berg; Jun Zhang; John Keech; Kalpaj R Parekh; Sudershan Bhatia; Varun Monga; Kellie L Bodeker; Logan Ahmann; Sandy Vollstedt; Heather Brown; Erin P Shanahan Kauffman; Mary E Schall; Ray J Hohl; Gerald H Clamon; Jeremy D Greenlee; Matthew A Howard; Michael K Schultz; Brian J Smith; Dennis P Riley; Frederick E Domann; Joseph J Cullen; Garry R Buettner; John M Buatti; Douglas R Spitz; Bryan G Allen
Journal:  Cancer Cell       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 31.743

3.  Reduced oxygen enhancement ratio at low doses of ionizing radiation.

Authors:  B Palcic; L D Skarsgard
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 2.841

4.  Hydrogen peroxide mediates the radiation-induced mutator phenotype in mammalian cells.

Authors:  Disha Dayal; Sean M Martin; Charles L Limoli; Douglas R Spitz
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 3.857

Review 5.  Iron and cancer: more ore to be mined.

Authors:  Suzy V Torti; Frank M Torti
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 60.716

6.  Oxygen depletion in irradiated aqueous solutions containing electron affinic hypoxic cell radiosensitizers.

Authors:  H B Michaels
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 7.  The pecking order of free radicals and antioxidants: lipid peroxidation, alpha-tocopherol, and ascorbate.

Authors:  G R Buettner
Journal:  Arch Biochem Biophys       Date:  1993-02-01       Impact factor: 4.013

8.  Increased levels of superoxide and H2O2 mediate the differential susceptibility of cancer cells versus normal cells to glucose deprivation.

Authors:  Nùkhet Aykin-Burns; Iman M Ahmad; Yueming Zhu; Larry W Oberley; Douglas R Spitz
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 3.857

9.  Relative alpha-tocopherol deficiency in cultured cells: free radical-mediated lipid peroxidation, lipid oxidizability, and cellular polyunsaturated fatty acid content.

Authors:  E E Kelley; G R Buettner; C P Burns
Journal:  Arch Biochem Biophys       Date:  1995-05-10       Impact factor: 4.013

Review 10.  Fenton chemistry: an introduction.

Authors:  P Wardman; L P Candeias
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 2.841

View more
  40 in total

1.  Response to letter regarding "An integrated physico-chemical approach for explaining the differential impact of FLASH versus conventional dose rate irradiation on cancer and normal tissue responses".

Authors:  Douglas R Spitz; Garry R Buettner; Charles L Limoli
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 6.280

2.  Long-term neurocognitive benefits of FLASH radiotherapy driven by reduced reactive oxygen species.

Authors:  Pierre Montay-Gruel; Munjal M Acharya; Kristoffer Petersson; Leila Alikhani; Chakradhar Yakkala; Barrett D Allen; Jonathan Ollivier; Benoit Petit; Patrik Gonçalves Jorge; Amber R Syage; Thuan A Nguyen; Al Anoud D Baddour; Celine Lu; Paramvir Singh; Raphael Moeckli; François Bochud; Jean-François Germond; Pascal Froidevaux; Claude Bailat; Jean Bourhis; Marie-Catherine Vozenin; Charles L Limoli
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Design, Implementation, and in Vivo Validation of a Novel Proton FLASH Radiation Therapy System.

Authors:  Eric S Diffenderfer; Ioannis I Verginadis; Michele M Kim; Khayrullo Shoniyozov; Anastasia Velalopoulou; Denisa Goia; Mary Putt; Sarah Hagan; Stephen Avery; Kevin Teo; Wei Zou; Alexander Lin; Samuel Swisher-McClure; Cameron Koch; Ann R Kennedy; Andy Minn; Amit Maity; Theresa M Busch; Lei Dong; Costas Koumenis; James Metz; Keith A Cengel
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 4.  Biological Benefits of Ultra-high Dose Rate FLASH Radiotherapy: Sleeping Beauty Awoken.

Authors:  M-C Vozenin; J H Hendry; C L Limoli
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2019-04-19       Impact factor: 4.126

5.  Ultra-High-Dose-Rate FLASH Irradiation Limits Reactive Gliosis in the Brain.

Authors:  Pierre Montay-Gruel; Mineh Markarian; Barrett D Allen; Jabra D Baddour; Erich Giedzinski; Patrik Goncalves Jorge; Benoît Petit; Claude Bailat; Marie-Catherine Vozenin; Charles Limoli; Munjal M Acharya
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  Ultra-High Dose-Rate, Pulsed (FLASH) Radiotherapy with Carbon Ions: Generation of Early, Transient, Highly Oxygenated Conditions in the Tumor Environment.

Authors:  Abdullah Muhammad Zakaria; Nicholas W Colangelo; Jintana Meesungnoen; Edouard I Azzam; Marc-Émile Plourde; Jean-Paul Jay-Gerin
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  The Importance and Clinical Implications of FLASH Ultra-High Dose-Rate Studies for Proton and Heavy Ion Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Nicholas W Colangelo; Edouard I Azzam
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  Response to Ling et al. regarding "An integrated physico-chemical approach for explaining the differential impact of FLASH versus conventional dose rate irradiation on cancer and normal tissue responses".

Authors:  Garry R Buettner; Douglas R Spitz; Charles L Limoli
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 6.280

9.  Modeling the effect of oxygen on the chemical stage of water radiolysis using GPU-based microscopic Monte Carlo simulations, with an application in FLASH radiotherapy.

Authors:  Youfang Lai; Xun Jia; Yujie Chi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  FLASH Irradiation Results in Reduced Severe Skin Toxicity Compared to Conventional-Dose-Rate Irradiation.

Authors:  Luis A Soto; Kerriann M Casey; Jinghui Wang; Alexandra Blaney; Rakesh Manjappa; Dylan Breitkreutz; Lawrie Skinner; Suparna Dutt; Ryan B Ko; Karl Bush; Amy S Yu; Stavros Melemenidis; Samuel Strober; Edgar Englemann; Peter G Maxim; Edward E Graves; Billy W Loo
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 2.841

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.