Literature DB >> 33804336

FLASH Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Irradiation Minimizes Radiation-Induced Leg Contracture and Skin Toxicity in Mice.

Shannon Cunningham1, Shelby McCauley1, Kanimozhi Vairamani1, Joseph Speth2, Swati Girdhani3, Eric Abel3, Ricky A Sharma3, John P Perentesis1,4, Susanne I Wells1,4, Anthony Mascia2, Mathieu Sertorio1,4.   

Abstract

Ultra-high dose rate radiation has been reported to produce a more favorable toxicity and tumor control profile compared to conventional dose rates that are used for patient treatment. So far, the so-called FLASH effect has been validated for electron, photon and scattered proton beam, but not yet for proton pencil beam scanning (PBS). Because PBS is the state-of-the-art delivery modality for proton therapy and constitutes a wide and growing installation base, we determined the benefit of FLASH PBS on skin and soft tissue toxicity. Using a pencil beam scanning nozzle and the plateau region of a 250 MeV proton beam, a uniform physical dose of 35 Gy (toxicity study) or 15 Gy (tumor control study) was delivered to the right hind leg of mice at various dose rates: Sham, Conventional (Conv, 1 Gy/s), Flash60 (57 Gy/s) and Flash115 (115 Gy/s). Acute radiation effects were quantified by measurements of plasma and skin levels of TGF-β1 and skin toxicity scoring. Delayed irradiation response was defined by hind leg contracture as a surrogate of irradiation-induced skin and soft tissue toxicity and by plasma levels of 13 different cytokines (CXCL1, CXCL10, Eotaxin, IL1-beta, IL-6, MCP-1, Mip1alpha, TNF-alpha, TNF-beta, VEGF, G-CSF, GM-CSF and TGF- β1). Plasma and skin levels of TGF-β1, skin toxicity and leg contracture were all significantly decreased in FLASH compared to Conv groups of mice. FLASH and Conv PBS had similar efficacy with regards to growth control of MOC1 and MOC2 head and neck cancer cells transplanted into syngeneic, immunocompetent mice. These results demonstrate consistent delivery of FLASH PBS radiation from 1 to 115 Gy/s in a clinical gantry. Radiation response following delivery of 35 Gy indicates potential benefits of FLASH versus conventional PBS that are related to skin and soft tissue toxicity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FLASH; normal tissue toxicity; proton beam scanning; proton therapy; skin and soft tissue; ultra-high dose rate

Year:  2021        PMID: 33804336      PMCID: PMC7957631          DOI: 10.3390/cancers13051012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancers (Basel)        ISSN: 2072-6694            Impact factor:   6.639


  14 in total

1.  Model studies of the role of oxygen in the FLASH effect.

Authors:  Vincent Favaudon; Rudi Labarbe; Charles L Limoli
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-08-18       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Adaptation and dosimetric commissioning of a synchrotron-based proton beamline for FLASH experiments.

Authors:  Ming Yang; Xiaochun Wang; Fada Guan; Uwe Titt; Kiminori Iga; Dadi Jiang; Takeshi Takaoka; Satoshi Tootake; Tadashi Katayose; Masumi Umezawa; Emil Schüler; Steven Frank; Steven H Lin; Narayan Sahoo; Albert C Koong; Radhe Mohan; X Ronald Zhu
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 4.174

3.  Shining a FLASHlight on Ultrahigh Dose-Rate Radiation and Possible Late Toxicity.

Authors:  Amit Maity; Constantinos Koumenis
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2022-09-01       Impact factor: 13.801

Review 4.  The mouse oral carcinoma (MOC) model: A 10-year retrospective on model development and head and neck cancer investigations.

Authors:  Michihisa Kono; Shin Saito; Ann Marie Egloff; Clint T Allen; Ravindra Uppaluri
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2022-07-09       Impact factor: 5.972

5.  Development of Ultra-High Dose-Rate (FLASH) Particle Therapy.

Authors:  Michele M Kim; Arash Darafsheh; Jan Schuemann; Ivana Dokic; Olle Lundh; Tianyu Zhao; José Ramos-Méndez; Lei Dong; Kristoffer Petersson
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2021-06-22

6.  Ultra-high dose rate radiation production and delivery systems intended for FLASH.

Authors:  Jonathan Farr; Veljko Grilj; Victor Malka; Srinivasan Sudharsan; Marco Schippers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 4.506

7.  Letter in Response to Doyen et al., "Early Toxicities After High Dose Rate Proton Therapy in Cancer Treatments".

Authors:  Pierre Montay-Gruel; Marie-Catherine Vozenin; Charles L Limoli
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  FLASH Radiotherapy Using Single-Energy Proton PBS Transmission Beams for Hypofractionation Liver Cancer: Dose and Dose Rate Quantification.

Authors:  Shouyi Wei; Haibo Lin; J Isabelle Choi; Robert H Press; Stanislav Lazarev; Rafi Kabarriti; Carla Hajj; Shaakir Hasan; Arpit M Chhabra; Charles B Simone; Minglei Kang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 9.  A roadmap to clinical trials for FLASH.

Authors:  Paige A Taylor; Jean M Moran; David A Jaffray; Jeffrey C Buchsbaum
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2022-04-25       Impact factor: 4.506

10.  FLASH Proton Radiotherapy Spares Normal Epithelial and Mesenchymal Tissues While Preserving Sarcoma Response.

Authors:  Keith A Cengel; Amit Maity; Theresa M Busch; Anastasia Velalopoulou; Ilias V Karagounis; Gwendolyn M Cramer; Michele M Kim; Giorgos Skoufos; Denisa Goia; Sarah Hagan; Ioannis I Verginadis; Khayrullo Shoniyozov; June Chiango; Michelle Cerullo; Kelley Varner; Lutian Yao; Ling Qin; Artemis G Hatzigeorgiou; Andy J Minn; Mary Putt; Matthew Lanza; Charles-Antoine Assenmacher; Enrico Radaelli; Jennifer Huck; Eric Diffenderfer; Lei Dong; James Metz; Constantinos Koumenis
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2021-07-28       Impact factor: 13.312

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.