Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams
- PMID: 37839557
- DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109953
Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams
Abstract
Background and purpose: The FLASH effect has been validated in different preclinical experiments with electrons (eFLASH) and protons (pFLASH) operating at an average dose rate above 40 Gy/s. However, no systematic intercomparison of the FLASH effect produced by eFLASHvs. pFLASH has yet been performed and constitutes the aim of the present study.
Materials and methods: The electron eRT6/Oriatron/CHUV/5.5 MeV and proton Gantry1/PSI/170 MeV were used to deliver conventional (0.1 Gy/s eCONV and pCONV) and FLASH (≥110 Gy/s eFLASH and pFLASH) dose rates. Protons were delivered in transmission. Dosimetric and biologic intercomparisons were performed using previously validated dosimetric approaches and experimental murine models.
Results: The difference between the average absorbed dose measured at Gantry 1 with PSI reference dosimeters and with CHUV/IRA dosimeters was -1.9 % (0.1 Gy/s) and + 2.5 % (110 Gy/s). The neurocognitive capacity of eFLASH and pFLASH irradiated mice was indistinguishable from the control, while both eCONV and pCONV irradiated cohorts showed cognitive decrements. Complete tumor response was obtained after an ablative dose of 20 Gy delivered with the two beams at CONV and FLASH dose rates. Tumor rejection upon rechallenge indicates that anti-tumor immunity was activated independently of the beam-type and the dose-rate.
Conclusion: Despite major differences in the temporal microstructure of proton and electron beams, this study shows that dosimetric standards can be established. Normal brain protection and tumor control were produced by the two beams. More specifically, normal brain protection was achieved when a single dose of 10 Gy was delivered in 90 ms or less, suggesting that the most important physical parameter driving the FLASH sparing effect might be the mean dose rate. In addition, a systemic anti-tumor immunological memory response was observed in mice exposed to high ablative dose of electron and proton delivered at CONV and FLASH dose rate.
Keywords: Dosimetry; FLASH; Intercomparison; Neurocognition; Tumor response.
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Vozenin reports financial support was provided by Varian Medical Systems Inc. Vozenin reports a relationship with Varian Medical Systems Inc that includes: funding grants. the support also apply to D Weber, T Lomax, D Meer, S Psoroulas.
Update of
-
Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams.bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2023 Apr 21:2023.04.20.537497. doi: 10.1101/2023.04.20.537497. bioRxiv. 2023. Update in: Radiother Oncol. 2024 Jan;190:109953. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109953. PMID: 37131769 Free PMC article. Updated. Preprint.
Similar articles
-
Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams.bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2023 Apr 21:2023.04.20.537497. doi: 10.1101/2023.04.20.537497. bioRxiv. 2023. Update in: Radiother Oncol. 2024 Jan;190:109953. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109953. PMID: 37131769 Free PMC article. Updated. Preprint.
-
Discordance in Acute Gastrointestinal Toxicity between Synchrotron-Based Proton and Linac-based Electron Ultra-High Dose Rate Irradiation.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2025 Jun 1;122(2):491-501. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.01.007. Epub 2025 Jan 23. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2025. PMID: 39862897
-
Discordance in acute gastrointestinal toxicity between synchrotron-based proton and linac-based electron ultra-high dose rate irradiation.bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2024 Sep 8:2024.09.04.611307. doi: 10.1101/2024.09.04.611307. bioRxiv. 2024. Update in: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2025 Jun 1;122(2):491-501. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.01.007. PMID: 39282305 Free PMC article. Updated. Preprint.
-
Dosimetry of clinical neutron and proton beams: an overview of recommendations.Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2004;110(1-4):565-72. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nch221. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2004. PMID: 15353710 Review.
-
Review of Conventional and High Dose Rate Brain Radiation (FLASH): Neurobehavioural, Neurocognitive and Assessment Issues in Rodent Models.Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021 Nov;33(11):e482-e491. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.09.002. Epub 2021 Sep 20. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021. PMID: 34548203 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
FLASH Radiotherapy: Expectations, Challenges, and Current Knowledge.Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Feb 22;25(5):2546. doi: 10.3390/ijms25052546. Int J Mol Sci. 2024. PMID: 38473799 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Mechanisms of Action in FLASH Radiotherapy: A Comprehensive Review of Physicochemical and Biological Processes on Cancerous and Normal Cells.Cells. 2024 May 14;13(10):835. doi: 10.3390/cells13100835. Cells. 2024. PMID: 38786057 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Differentiating unirradiated mice from those exposed to conventional or FLASH radiotherapy using MRI.bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2025 Feb 6:2025.02.01.636061. doi: 10.1101/2025.02.01.636061. bioRxiv. 2025. PMID: 39974878 Free PMC article. Preprint.
-
A multi-institutional study to investigate the sparing effect after whole brain electron FLASH in mice: Reproducibility and temporal evolution of functional, electrophysiological, and neurogenic endpoints.Radiother Oncol. 2024 Dec;201:110534. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110534. Epub 2024 Sep 16. Radiother Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39293721 Free PMC article.
-
Oxygen consumption measurements at ultra-high dose rate over a wide LET range.Med Phys. 2025 Feb;52(2):1323-1334. doi: 10.1002/mp.17496. Epub 2024 Nov 6. Med Phys. 2025. PMID: 39504410 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical