van Marlen Patricia, Verbakel Wilko F A R, Slotman Ben J, Dahele Max
Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Adv Radiat Oncol. 2022 Apr 10;7(4):100954. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.100954. eCollection 2022 Jul-Aug.
Research suggests that in addition to the dose-rate, a dose threshold is also important for the reduction in normal tissue toxicity with similar tumor control after ultrahigh dose-rate radiation therapy (UHDR-RT). In this analysis we aimed to identify factors that might limit the ability to achieve this "FLASH"-effect in a scenario attractive for UHDR-RT (high fractional beam dose, small target, few organs-at-risk): single-fraction 34 Gy lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.
Clinical volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans and transmission beam (TB) plans were compared for 6 small and 1 large lung lesion. The TB-plan dose-rate was calculated using 4 methods and the FLASH-percentage (percentage of dose delivered at dose-rates ≥40/100 Gy/s and ≥4/8 Gy) was determined for various variables: a minimum spot time (minST) of 0.5/2 ms, maximum nozzle current (maxN) of 200/40 0nA, and 2 gantry current (GC) techniques (energy-layer based, spot-based [SB]).
Based on absolute doses 5-beam TB and VMAT-plans are similar, but TB-plans have higher rib, skin, and ipsilateral lung dose than IMPT. Dose-rate calculation methods not considering scanning achieve FLASH-percentages between ∼30% to 80%, while methods considering scanning often achieve <30%. FLASH-percentages increase for lower minST/higher maxN and when using SB GC instead of energy-layer based GC, often approaching the percentage of dose exceeding the dose-threshold. For the small lesions average beam irradiation times (including scanning) varied between 0.06 to 0.31 seconds and total irradiation times between 0.28 to 1.57 seconds, for the large lesion beam times were between 0.16 to 1.47 seconds with total irradiation times of 1.09 to 5.89 seconds.
In a theoretically advantageous scenario for FLASH we found that TB-plan dosimetry was similar to that of VMAT, but inferior to that of IMPT, and that decreasing minST or using SB GC increase the estimated amount of FLASH. For the appropriate machine/delivery parameters high enough dose-rates can be achieved regardless of calculation method, meaning that a possible FLASH dose-threshold will likely be the primary limiting factor.
研究表明,除剂量率外,剂量阈值对于在超高剂量率放射治疗(UHDR-RT)后实现相似肿瘤控制的同时降低正常组织毒性也很重要。在本分析中,我们旨在确定在对UHDR-RT有吸引力的情况下(高分次束剂量、小靶区、少数危及器官)可能限制实现这种“FLASH”效应能力的因素:单次34 Gy肺部立体定向体部放射治疗。
比较了6个小肺部病变和1个大肺部病变的临床容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)计划、调强质子治疗(IMPT)计划和透射束(TB)计划。使用4种方法计算TB计划的剂量率,并针对各种变量确定FLASH百分比(在剂量率≥40/100 Gy/s和≥4/8 Gy时递送的剂量百分比):最小光斑时间(minST)为0.5/2 ms、最大喷嘴电流(maxN)为200/400 nA,以及2种机架电流(GC)技术(基于能量层、基于光斑[SB])。
基于绝对剂量,5束TB计划和VMAT计划相似,但TB计划的肋骨、皮肤和同侧肺剂量高于IMPT。不考虑扫描的剂量率计算方法可实现的FLASH百分比在30%至80%之间,而考虑扫描的方法通常低于30%。对于更低的minST/更高的maxN以及使用SB GC而非基于能量层的GC时,FLASH百分比会增加,通常接近超过剂量阈值的剂量百分比。对于小病变,平均束照射时间(包括扫描)在0.06至0.31秒之间,总照射时间在0.28至1.57秒之间;对于大病变,束照射时间在0.16至1.47秒之间,总照射时间在1.09至5.89秒之间。
在理论上对FLASH有利的情况下,我们发现TB计划剂量测定与VMAT相似,但不如IMPT,并且降低minST或使用SB GC会增加估计的FLASH量。对于合适的机器/递送参数,无论计算方法如何都能实现足够高的剂量率,这意味着可能的FLASH剂量阈值可能是主要限制因素。