| Literature DB >> 32499539 |
Florian-Emanuel Brack1,2, Florian Kroll3, Lennart Gaus3,4, Constantin Bernert3,4, Elke Beyreuther3,5, Thomas E Cowan3,4, Leonhard Karsch3,5, Stephan Kraft3, Leoni A Kunz-Schughart5,6, Elisabeth Lessmann3, Josefine Metzkes-Ng3, Lieselotte Obst-Huebl3,7, Jörg Pawelke3,5, Martin Rehwald3,4, Hans-Peter Schlenvoigt3, Ulrich Schramm3,4, Manfred Sobiella3, Emília Rita Szabó8, Tim Ziegler3,4, Karl Zeil3.
Abstract
Intense laser-driven proton pulses, inherently broadband and highly divergent, pose a challenge to established beamline concepts on the path to application-adapted irradiation field formation, particularly for 3D. Here we experimentally show the successful implementation of a highly efficient (50% transmission) and tuneable dual pulsed solenoid setup to generate a homogeneous (laterally and in depth) volumetric dose distribution (cylindrical volume of 5 mm diameter and depth) at a single pulse dose of 0.7 Gy via multi-energy slice selection from the broad input spectrum. The experiments were conducted at the Petawatt beam of the Dresden Laser Acceleration Source Draco and were aided by a predictive simulation model verified by proton transport studies. With the characterised beamline we investigated manipulation and matching of lateral and depth dose profiles to various desired applications and targets. Using an adapted dose profile, we performed a first proof-of-technical-concept laser-driven proton irradiation of volumetric in-vitro tumour tissue (SAS spheroids) to demonstrate concurrent operation of laser accelerator, beam shaping, dosimetry and irradiation procedure of volumetric biological samples.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32499539 PMCID: PMC7272427 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-65775-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Schematic of the proton beamline at the Draco laser facility. At positions P1–5 detectors can be installed. (b) Representative proton source characteristics from RCF stack measurements: integrated TNSA proton spectrum (top) and the angular distribution (bottom) for full energy Draco PW shot on a 80 nm plastic target. The orange line represents a parametrisation to the shown RCF data. (c) Penetration depth (bulk scintillator, top) and lateral dose distributions of proton beams of main energy ~19 MeV focused at P4 via single solenoid transport (right column) or dual solenoid transport (left column). The lateral dose distributions are recorded on RCF (corresponding Bragg peak energies 7.9 MeV and 18.6 MeV) and the red circles represent a typical aperture size (5 mm diameter) for proposed irradiation experiments.
Figure 2Experimental verification of the beamline model and determination of translation factors α0–3 and β: (a) Comparison of measured and simulated (GPT) B-field on axis of S1 resulting in α0 = 1.06. The zero position corresponds to the solenoid centre. (b) Relation between focused proton energy (at P4) and applied solenoid current for simulations (orange) and experiment (blue). The dashed orange line shows the simulated values multiplied with the translation factor α1 = 1.08. The experimentally focused energy was determined from the penetration depth of the protons in a scintillator block at P4. (c) Energy resolved beam size formation for free propagation to P2 (orange) and P3 (blue) leading to α2 = 1.05. Coloured areas represent 95% confidence band of the fit functions. Of the two shown RCFs (corresponding Bragg peak energy 25.5 MeV) in the inset, the left RCF (placed at P2) has half the size of the right RCF (at P3) and was blocking/detecting half of the beam. (d) Normalised proton energy spectrum from time-of-flight (blue) in comparison to simulation (orange) for α3 = 1.14. (e) Comparison of a normalised experimental transmission spectrum (blue dots, experimental data originating from RCF stack measurement at P4) for dual solenoid transport with equivalent simulation using α = β = 1.09 (orange line). The higher discrepancy for lower energetic protons is due to their larger divergence angle and the fact that simulation particles are distributed homogeneously over the corresponding angle, whereas TNSA protons exhibit a Gaussian-like angular distribution. The shown simulations in green (α = β = 1.14) and red (α = β = 1.05) indicate the sensitivity of our model. Both graphs are normalised with respect to the transmitted proton number for α = β = 1.09.
Figure 3(a) Transmission efficiency (T) heat map for protons with (25 ± 1) MeV as a function of solenoid currents I1,sim and I2,sim. The lower indicated point marks the maximum transport efficiency for using only S1, the upper one the most efficient setting for dual solenoid transport. (b) Associated proton trajectories from GPT simulation. The light yellow areas mark the solenoids. As guides for the eye, highly divergent incoming protons are marked in blue. They are focused closer to the source than protons with low initial divergence (orange). Dark grey boxes sketch the final aperture defining the irradiation area; only particles propagating through count as transmitted by the beamline. (c) Lateral dose distribution for two chosen energies from one RCF stack at P4, dose-evaluated data from the films shown in Fig. 1(c). Dual solenoid transport (left) yields two separate focal spot features of different kinetic energies, i.e ~8 MeV and ~19 MeV. The right focus was formed operating only solenoid S1.
Figure 4Generation of homogeneous dose distributions via pulsed high-field beamline. (a) Compilation of RCF dose pictures (colour scale in Gy). Films at the top were irradiated at P5 without scatter foil and final aperture (5 mm aperture size depicted in yellow). Two dose features corresponding to the two transported energy components can be distinguished. Films at the bottom show homogenised lateral dose distributions at P5 when a 25 μm brass scatter foil is introduced at P4, a 5 mm aperture is depicted in black. The RCF data was acquired via cumulative irradiations with five consecutive proton pulses. (b) Associated depth dose profiles. The mean dose values were evaluated over the area of the final aperture with 5 mm diameter and are presented as mean dose per shot. Inset: Exemplary dose stability with indicated 10% variation interval shown as dose per shot (DPS) for 23 consecutive shots. (c) Comparison of the lateral dose distribution of lineouts of 1 mm width across the 5 mm aperture diameter. The RCF numbers and pictures correspond to the RCFs shown in (a). The top row shows the case without scatter foil, bottom row shows the scattered case. The coloured area represents 10% peak to valley deviation in dose homogeneity. The ripples in the profiles originate from the limited spatial resolution of RCFs in combination with digitisation and are common in RCF data analysis.
Figure 5(a) Depth dose distributions (RCF measurement) for different irradiation setups (solenoid currents) while keeping the input spectrum constant. (b) Median sections (10 μm thickness) through an unirradiated (left) and a 15.3 Gy irradiated tumour spheroid (right) both labelled for DNA double strand breaks (bright spots). After irradiation, a ring of laser-driven proton induced DNA DSBs is clearly visible. The spheroid centre does not show DNA DSBs because of a necrotic area, common to spheroids of this size (see methods section for details).