skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: TU-H-CAMPUS-TeP2-02: FLASH Irradiation Improves the Therapeutic Index Following GI Tract Irradiation

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate and characterize the radiobiological effectiveness of very high dose rate radiotherapy (FLASH) compared to conventional irradiation in an in vivo model. Methods: The gastrointestinal (GI) tract of C57BL/6 mice were irradiated with doses ranging between 10 and 18 Gy using a custom stereotactic jig. A Varian Clinac 21EX was modified to allow dose rates ranging from 0.05 to 240 Gy/s at the position of the mirror. With the gantry at 180 degrees, the jig holding the individual animals was placed above the mirror to take advantage of the reduced source to target distance. Mice were irradiated with 20MeV electrons. Following irradiation, the mice were monitored twice daily for morbidity and daily for weight changes. Results: Mice irradiated with FLASH irradiation had lower weight loss compared to the mice receiving conventional irradiation. Following FLASH irradiation, a maximum weight loss of ∼20% was observed at day 6 with subsequent recovery, while following conventional irradiation, higher weight losses was observed with fewer instances of recovery. Concerning survival, all mice in the conventionally irradiated groups had a 100% mortality in the range of 15.5–18 Gy, while the mice irradiated with FLASH irradiation had a 100% survival in the same range. Conclusion:more » These results have demonstrated proof of principle that FLASH irradiations have a dramatic impact on the overall survival of mice following GI tract irradiations. If the increase in the therapeutic window can be validated and understood, this would revolutionize the field of radiation oncology and lead to increased cure rates with reduced side effects following treatment, resulting in increased quality of life for cancer survivors. Funding: DoD, Award#:W81XWH-14-1-0014, Weston Havens Foundation, Bio-X (Stanford University), the Office of the Dean of the Medical School, the Office of the Provost (Stanford University), and the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation; BL and PM are founders of TibaRay,Inc.; BL and PM have received research grants from Varian and RaySearch Laboratory.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22654066
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; DISEASE INCIDENCE; DOSE RATES; EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES; IRRADIATION; MICE; RADIOTHERAPY; RATS; SIDE EFFECTS

Citation Formats

Schueler, E, Trovati, S, King, G, Lartey, F, Rafat, M, Loo, B, and Maxim, P. TU-H-CAMPUS-TeP2-02: FLASH Irradiation Improves the Therapeutic Index Following GI Tract Irradiation. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4957690.
Schueler, E, Trovati, S, King, G, Lartey, F, Rafat, M, Loo, B, & Maxim, P. TU-H-CAMPUS-TeP2-02: FLASH Irradiation Improves the Therapeutic Index Following GI Tract Irradiation. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4957690.
Schueler, E, Trovati, S, King, G, Lartey, F, Rafat, M, Loo, B, and Maxim, P. 2016. "TU-H-CAMPUS-TeP2-02: FLASH Irradiation Improves the Therapeutic Index Following GI Tract Irradiation". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4957690.
@article{osti_22654066,
title = {TU-H-CAMPUS-TeP2-02: FLASH Irradiation Improves the Therapeutic Index Following GI Tract Irradiation},
author = {Schueler, E and Trovati, S and King, G and Lartey, F and Rafat, M and Loo, B and Maxim, P},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To investigate and characterize the radiobiological effectiveness of very high dose rate radiotherapy (FLASH) compared to conventional irradiation in an in vivo model. Methods: The gastrointestinal (GI) tract of C57BL/6 mice were irradiated with doses ranging between 10 and 18 Gy using a custom stereotactic jig. A Varian Clinac 21EX was modified to allow dose rates ranging from 0.05 to 240 Gy/s at the position of the mirror. With the gantry at 180 degrees, the jig holding the individual animals was placed above the mirror to take advantage of the reduced source to target distance. Mice were irradiated with 20MeV electrons. Following irradiation, the mice were monitored twice daily for morbidity and daily for weight changes. Results: Mice irradiated with FLASH irradiation had lower weight loss compared to the mice receiving conventional irradiation. Following FLASH irradiation, a maximum weight loss of ∼20% was observed at day 6 with subsequent recovery, while following conventional irradiation, higher weight losses was observed with fewer instances of recovery. Concerning survival, all mice in the conventionally irradiated groups had a 100% mortality in the range of 15.5–18 Gy, while the mice irradiated with FLASH irradiation had a 100% survival in the same range. Conclusion: These results have demonstrated proof of principle that FLASH irradiations have a dramatic impact on the overall survival of mice following GI tract irradiations. If the increase in the therapeutic window can be validated and understood, this would revolutionize the field of radiation oncology and lead to increased cure rates with reduced side effects following treatment, resulting in increased quality of life for cancer survivors. Funding: DoD, Award#:W81XWH-14-1-0014, Weston Havens Foundation, Bio-X (Stanford University), the Office of the Dean of the Medical School, the Office of the Provost (Stanford University), and the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation; BL and PM are founders of TibaRay,Inc.; BL and PM have received research grants from Varian and RaySearch Laboratory.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4957690},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with anal canal cancer, in terms of local control (LC), freedom from relapse (FFR), and overall survival (OS) rates, and to estimate long-term toxicity data. Methods and Materials: Sixty historical patients, treated with conventional radiation techniques (C-RT), were used as controls, and 62 consecutive patients were treated with 3D-CRT. Patients treated with 3D-CRT received 54 Gy in 30 fractions delivered continuously, compared with 45-58.9 Gy (median dose, 54 Gy) in a split course in patients treated with C-RT. Chemotherapy consisted of 5-fluorouracil with either mitomycin-C or cis-platinummore » given concurrently with radiation. Survival curves were performed using the Kaplan-Meier model, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used for multivariate analysis of risk factors. Results: No differences in stage and age distribution were observed between the two groups. Patients treated with 3D-CRT and C-RT had an actuarial 5-year LC rate of 85.1% and 61.1%, respectively (p = 0.0056); the FFR rate was 70.2% and 46.1% (p = 0.0166), and the OS rate was 80.7% and 53.9% (p = 0.0171). In multivariate analysis, factors of significance for LC were nodal (N) status (p < 0.001); for OS, 3D-CRT (p = 0.038), N status (p 0.011), and T status (p = 0.012); and for FFR, 3D-CRT (p = 0.024) and N status (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The use of 3D-CRT allows patients with anal canal cancer to complete radiation and chemotherapy without interruption for toxicity, with significant improvements in LC, FFR, and OS.« less
  • Purpose: In radiation therapy optimization the constraints can be either hard constraints which must be satisfied or soft constraints which are included but do not need to be satisfied exactly. Currently the voxel dose constraints are viewed as soft constraints and included as a part of the objective function and approximated as an unconstrained problem. However in some treatment planning cases the constraints should be specified as hard constraints and solved by constrained optimization. The goal of this work is to present a computation efficiency graph form alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) algorithm for constrained quadratic treatment planning optimizationmore » and compare it with several commonly used algorithms/toolbox. Method: ADMM can be viewed as an attempt to blend the benefits of dual decomposition and augmented Lagrangian methods for constrained optimization. Various proximal operators were first constructed as applicable to quadratic IMRT constrained optimization and the problem was formulated in a graph form of ADMM. A pre-iteration operation for the projection of a point to a graph was also proposed to further accelerate the computation. Result: The graph form ADMM algorithm was tested by the Common Optimization for Radiation Therapy (CORT) dataset including TG119, prostate, liver, and head & neck cases. Both unconstrained and constrained optimization problems were formulated for comparison purposes. All optimizations were solved by LBFGS, IPOPT, Matlab built-in toolbox, CVX (implementing SeDuMi) and Mosek solvers. For unconstrained optimization, it was found that LBFGS performs the best, and it was 3–5 times faster than graph form ADMM. However, for constrained optimization, graph form ADMM was 8 – 100 times faster than the other solvers. Conclusion: A graph form ADMM can be applied to constrained quadratic IMRT optimization. It is more computationally efficient than several other commercial and noncommercial optimizers and it also used significantly less computer memory.« less
  • Purpose: To report the first experiences and perspectives in using direct multicriteria optimization (MCO) on volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for head and neck (H&N) cancer. Methods: Ten prior patients with tumors in representative H&N regions were selected to evaluate direct MCO-VMAT in RayStation v5.0 beta. The patients were previously treated by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with MCO on an Elekta linear accelerator with Agility multileaf collimator. To avoid radiating eyes and shoulders, MCO-VMAT required one to three partial-arc groups, with each group consisting of single or dual arcs. All MCO-VMAT plans were approved by a radiation oncologist. The MCO-VMAT andmore » MCO-IMRT plans were compared using V{sub 100}, D{sub 5}, homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) for planning target volume (PTV), D{sub mean} and D{sub 50} for six parallel organs and D{sub max} for five serial organs. Patient-specific quality assurance (QA) was performed using ArcCHECK for MCO-VMAT and Matrixx for MCO-IMRT with results analyzed using gamma criteria of 3%/3mm. Results: MCO-VMAT provided better V{sub 100} (+0.8%) lower D{sub 5}(− 0.3 Gy), lower HI (−0.27) and comparable CI (+0.05). MCO-VMAT decreased D{sub mean} and D{sub 50} for multiple parallel organs in seven of the ten patients. On average the reduction ranged from 2.1 (larynx) to 7.6 Gy (esophagus). For the nasal cavity and nasopharynx plans significant reduction in D{sub max} was observed for optics (up to 11 Gy) brainstem (6.4 Gy), cord (2.1 Gy) and mandible (6.7 Gy). All MCO-VMAT and -IMRT plans passed clinical QA. MCO-VMAT required slightly longer planning time due to the more complex VMAT optimization. The net beam-on time for the MCO-VMAT plans ranged from 80 to 242 seconds, up to 9 minutes shorter than MCO-IMRT. Conclusion: With similar target coverage, reduced organ dose, comparable planning time, and significantly faster treatment, MCO-VMAT is very likely to become the modality of choice in RayStation v5.0 for H&N cancer.« less
  • Purpose: This study utilizes the Taguchi Method to evaluate the VMAT planning parameters of single isocenter treatment plans for multiple brain metastases. An optimization model based on Taguchi and utility concept is employed to optimize the planning parameters including: arc arrangement, calculation grid size, calculation model, and beam energy on multiple performance characteristics namely conformity index and dose to normal brain. Methods: Treatment plans, each with 4 metastatic brain lesions were planned using single isocenter technique. The collimator angles were optimized to avoid open areas. In this analysis four planning parameters (a–d) were considered: (a)-Arc arrangements: set1: Gantry 181cw179 couch0;more » gantry179ccw0, couch315; and gantry0ccw181, couch45. set2: set1 plus additional arc: Gantry 0cw179, couch270. (b)-Energy: 6-MV; 6MV-FFF (c)-Calculation grid size: 1mm; 1.5mm (d)-Calculation models: AAA; Acuros Treatment planning was performed in Varian Eclipse (ver.11.0.30). A suitable orthogonal array was selected (L8) to perform the experiments. After conducting the experiments with the combinations of planning parameters the conformity index (CI) and the normal brain dose S/N ratio for each parameter was calculated. Optimum levels for the multiple response optimizations were determined. Results: We determined that the factors most affecting the conformity index are arc arrangement and beam energy. These tests were also used to evaluate dose to normal brain. In these evaluations, the significant parameters were grid size and calculation model. Using the utility concept we determined the combination of each of the four factors tested in this study that most significantly influence quality of the resulting treatment plans: (a)-arc arrangement-set2, (b)-6MV, (c)-calc.grid 1mm, (d)-Acuros algorithm. Overall, the dominant significant influences on plan quality are (a)-arcarrangement, and (b)-beamenergy. Conclusion: Results were analyzed using ANOVA and were found to be within the confidence interval. Further investigation using this methodology. Such parameters might include: virtual OAR and optimization criterion such as normal tissue objective.« less
  • Purpose: The purpose of this work is to develop a method for inverse planning of radiation therapy margins. When using this method the user specifies a desired target coverage probability and the system optimizes to meet the demand without any explicit specification of margins to handle setup uncertainty. Methods: The method determines which voxels to include in an optimization function promoting target coverage in order to achieve a specified target coverage probability. Voxels are selected in a way that retains the correlation between them: The target is displaced according to the setup errors and the voxels to include are selectedmore » as the union of the displaced target regions under the x% best scenarios according to some quality measure. The quality measure could depend on the dose to the considered structure alone or could depend on the dose to multiple structures in order to take into account correlation between structures. Results: A target coverage function was applied to the CTV of a prostate case with prescription 78 Gy and compared to conventional planning using a DVH function on the PTV. Planning was performed to achieve 90% probability of CTV coverage. The plan optimized using the coverage probability function had P(D98 > 77.95 Gy) = 0.97 for the CTV. The PTV plan using a constraint on minimum DVH 78 Gy at 90% had P(D98 > 77.95) = 0.44 for the CTV. To match the coverage probability optimization, the DVH volume parameter had to be increased to 97% which resulted in 0.5 Gy higher average dose to the rectum. Conclusion: Optimizing a target coverage probability is an easily used method to find a margin that achieves the desired coverage probability. It can lead to reduced OAR doses at the same coverage probability compared to planning with margins and DVH functions.« less