Daria Boscolo1, Emanuele Scifoni2, Marco Durante3, Michael Krämer1, Martina C Fuss4. 1. GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany. 2. Trento Institute for Fundamental Physics and Applications (TIFPA), National Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN), Trento, Italy. 3. GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany; Institut für Physik Kondensierter Materie, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany. Electronic address: m.durante@gsi.de. 4. GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany. Electronic address: m.fuss@gsi.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent observations in animal models show that ultra-high dose rate ("FLASH") radiation treatment significantly reduces normal tissue toxicity maintaining an equivalent tumor control. The dependence of this "FLASH" effect on target oxygenation has led to the assumption that oxygen "depletion" could be its major driving force. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a bottom-up approach starting from the chemical track evolution of 1 MeV electrons in oxygenated water simulated with the TRAX-CHEM Monte Carlo code, we determine the oxygen consumption and radiolytic reactive oxygen species production following a short radiation pulse. Based on these values, the effective dose weighted by oxygen enhancement ratio (OER) or the in vitro cell survival under dynamic oxygen pressure is calculated and compared to that of conventional exposures, at constant OER. RESULTS: We find an excellent agreement of our Monte Carlo predictions with the experimental value for radiolytic oxygen removal from oxygenated water. However, the application of the present model to published radiobiological experiment conditions shows that oxygen depletion can only have a negligible impact on radiosensitivity through oxygen enhancement, especially at typical experimental oxygenations where a FLASH effect has been observed. CONCLUSION: We show that the magnitude and dependence of the "oxygen depletion" hypothesis are not consistent with the observed biological effects of FLASH irradiation. While oxygenation plays an undoubted role in mediating the FLASH effect, we conclude that state-of-the-art radiation chemistry models do not support oxygen depletion and radiation-induced transient hypoxia as the main mechanism.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent observations in animal models show that ultra-high dose rate ("FLASH") radiation treatment significantly reduces normal tissue toxicity maintaining an equivalent tumor control. The dependence of this "FLASH" effect on target oxygenation has led to the assumption that oxygen "depletion" could be its major driving force. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a bottom-up approach starting from the chemical track evolution of 1 MeV electrons in oxygenated water simulated with the TRAX-CHEM Monte Carlo code, we determine the oxygen consumption and radiolytic reactive oxygen species production following a short radiation pulse. Based on these values, the effective dose weighted by oxygen enhancement ratio (OER) or the in vitro cell survival under dynamic oxygen pressure is calculated and compared to that of conventional exposures, at constant OER. RESULTS: We find an excellent agreement of our Monte Carlo predictions with the experimental value for radiolytic oxygen removal from oxygenated water. However, the application of the present model to published radiobiological experiment conditions shows that oxygen depletion can only have a negligible impact on radiosensitivity through oxygen enhancement, especially at typical experimental oxygenations where a FLASH effect has been observed. CONCLUSION: We show that the magnitude and dependence of the "oxygen depletion" hypothesis are not consistent with the observed biological effects of FLASH irradiation. While oxygenation plays an undoubted role in mediating the FLASH effect, we conclude that state-of-the-art radiation chemistry models do not support oxygen depletion and radiation-induced transient hypoxia as the main mechanism.
Authors: Mirna El Khatib; Alexander L Van Slyke; Anastasia Velalopoulou; Michele M Kim; Khayrullo Shoniyozov; Srinivasa Rao Allu; Eric E Diffenderfer; Theresa M Busch; Rodney D Wiersma; Cameron J Koch; Sergei A Vinogradov Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2022-03-18 Impact factor: 8.013
Authors: Frank Van den Heuvel; Anna Vella; Francesca Fiorini; Mark Brooke; Mark Hill; Anderson Ryan; Tim Maughan; Amato Giaccia Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 4.174
Authors: Pankaj Chaudhary; Deborah C Gwynne; Boris Odlozilik; Aaron McMurray; Giuliana Milluzzo; Carla Maiorino; Domenico Doria; Hamad Ahmed; Lorenzo Romagnani; Aaron Alejo; Hersimerjit Padda; James Green; David Carroll; Nicola Booth; Paul McKenna; Satyabrata Kar; Giada Petringa; Roberto Catalano; Francesco P Cammarata; Giuseppe A P Cirrone; Stephen J McMahon; Kevin M Prise; Marco Borghesi Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-04-15 Impact factor: 4.309