Long-Term Results of Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Patients with at Least 10 Brain Metastases at Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: to evaluate an SRT approach in patients with at least 10 lesions at the time of BM initial diagnosis. METHODS: This is a monocentric prospective cohort of patients treated by SRT, followed by a brain MRI every two months. Subsequent SRT could be delivered in cases of new BMs during follow-up. The main endpoints were local control rate (LCR), overall survival (OS), and strategy success rate (SSR). Acute and late toxicity were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included from October 2014 to January 2019, and the most frequent primary diagnosis was non-small-cell lung cancer (N = 36, 51.4%). A total of 1174 BMs were treated at first treatment, corresponding to a median number of 14 BMs per patient. Most of the patients (N = 51, 72.6%) received a single fraction of 20-24 Gy. At 1 year, OS was 62.3%, with a median OS of 19.2 months, and SSR was 77.8%. A cumulative number of 1537 BM were treated over time, corresponding to a median cumulative number of 16 BM per patient. At 1-year, the LCR was 97.3%, with a cumulative incidence of radio-necrosis of 2.1% per lesion. Three patients (4.3%) presented Grade 2 toxicity, and there was no Grade ≥ 3 toxicity. The number of treated BMs and the treatment volume did not influence OS or SSR (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SRT was highly efficient in controlling the BM, with minimal side effects. In this setting, an SRT treatment should be proposed even in patients with ≥10 BMs at diagnosis.

Very high-energy electron therapy as light-particle alternative to transmission proton FLASH therapy - An evaluation of dosimetric performances.

PURPOSE: Clinical translation of FLASH-radiotherapy (RT) to deep-seated tumours is still a technological challenge. One proposed solution consists of using ultra-high dose rate transmission proton (TP) beams of about 200-250 MeV to irradiate the tumour with the flat entrance of the proton depth-dose profile. This work evaluates the dosimetric performance of very high-energy electron (VHEE)-based RT (50-250 MeV) as a potential alternative to TP-based RT for the clinical transfer of the FLASH effect. METHODS: Basic physics characteristics of VHEE and TP beams were compared utilizing Monte Carlo simulations in water. A VHEE-enabled research treatment planning system was used to evaluate the plan quality achievable with VHEE beams of different energies, compared to 250 MeV TP beams for a glioblastoma, an oesophagus, and a prostate cancer case. RESULTS: Like TP, VHEE above 100 MeV can treat targets with roughly flat (within ± 20 %) depth-dose distributions. The achievable dosimetric target conformity and adjacent organs-at-risk (OAR) sparing is consequently driven for both modalities by their lateral beam penumbrae. Electron beams of 400[500] MeV match the penumbra of 200[250] MeV TP beams and penumbra is increased for lower electron energies. For the investigated patient cases, VHEE plans with energies of 150 MeV and above achieved a dosimetric plan quality comparable to that of 250 MeV TP plans. For the glioblastoma and the oesophagus case, although having a decreased conformity, even 100 MeV VHEE plans provided a similar target coverage and OAR sparing compared to TP. CONCLUSIONS: VHEE-based FLASH-RT using sufficiently high beam energies may provide a lighter-particle alternative to TP-based FLASH-RT with comparable dosimetric plan quality.

3D-conformal very-high energy electron therapy as candidate modality for FLASH-RT: A treatment planning study for glioblastoma and lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) electron irradiations on time scales of 100 ms have demonstrated a remarkable sparing of brain and lung tissues while retaining tumor efficacy when compared to conventional dose rate irradiations. While clinically-used gantries and intensity modulation techniques are too slow to match such time scales, novel very-high energy electron (VHEE, 50-250 MeV) radiotherapy (RT) devices using 3D-conformed broad VHEE beams are designed to deliver UHDR treatments that fulfill these timing requirements. PURPOSE: To assess the dosimetric plan quality obtained using VHEE-based 3D-conformal RT (3D-CRT) for treatments of glioblastoma and lung cancer patients and compare the resulting treatment plans to those delivered by standard-of-care intensity modulated photon RT (IMRT) techniques. METHODS: Seven glioblastoma patients and seven lung cancer patients were planned with VHEE-based 3D-CRT using 3 to 16 coplanar beams with equidistant angular spacing and energies of 100 and 200 MeV using a forward planning approach. Dose distributions, dose-volume histograms, coverage (V95% ) and homogeneity (HI98% ) for the planning target volume (PTV), as well as near-maximum doses (D2% ) and mean doses (Dmean ) for organs-at-risk (OAR) were evaluated and compared to clinical IMRT plans. RESULTS: Mean differences of V95% and HI98% of all VHEE plans were within 2% or better of the IMRT reference plans. Glioblastoma plan dose metrics obtained with VHEE configurations of 200 MeV and 3-16 beams were either not significantly different or were significantly improved compared to the clinical IMRT reference plans. All OAR plan dose metrics evaluated for VHEE plans created using 5 beams of 100 MeV were either not significantly different or within 3% on average, except for Dmean for the body, Dmean for the brain, D2% for the brain stem, and D2% for the chiasm, which were significantly increased by 1, 2, 6, and 8 Gy, respectively (however below clinical constraints). Similarly, the dose metrics for lung cancer patients were also either not significantly different or were significantly improved compared to the reference plans for VHEE configurations with 200 MeV and 5 to 16 beams with the exception of D2% and Dmean to the spinal canal (however below clinical constraints). For the lung cancer cases, the VHEE configurations using 100 MeV or only 3 beams resulted in significantly worse dose metrics for some OAR. Differences in dose metrics were, however, strongly patient-specific and similar for some patient cases. CONCLUSIONS: VHEE-based 3D-CRT may deliver conformal treatments to simple, mostly convex target shapes in the brain and the thorax with a limited number of critical adjacent OAR using a limited number of beams (as low as 3 to 7). Using such treatment techniques, a dosimetric plan quality comparable to that of standard-of-care IMRT can be achieved. Hence, from a treatment planning perspective, 3D-conformal UHDR VHEE treatments delivered on time scales of 100 ms represent a promising candidate technique for the clinical transfer of the FLASH effect.

Effect of Conventional and Ultrahigh Dose Rate FLASH Irradiations on Preclinical Tumor Models: A Systematic Analysis.

PURPOSE: Compared with conventional dose rate irradiation (CONV), ultrahigh dose rate irradiation (UHDR) has shown superior normal tissue sparing. However, a clinically relevant widening of the therapeutic window by UHDR, termed "FLASH effect," also depends on the tumor toxicity obtained by UHDR. Based on a combined analysis of published literature, the current study examined the hypothesis of tumor isoefficacy for UHDR versus CONV and aimed to identify potential knowledge gaps to inspire future in vivo studies. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A systematic literature search identified publications assessing in vivo tumor responses comparing UHDR and CONV. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed, including combined analyses of tumor growth and survival data. RESULTS: We identified 66 data sets from 15 publications that compared UHDR and CONV for tumor efficacy. The median number of animals per group was 9 (range 3-15) and the median follow-up period was 30.5 days (range 11-230) after the first irradiation. Tumor growth assays were the predominant model used. Combined statistical analyses of tumor growth and survival data are consistent with UHDR isoefficacy compared with CONV. Only 1 study determined tumor-controlling dose (TCD50) and reported statistically nonsignificant differences. CONCLUSIONS: The combined quantitative analyses of tumor responses support the assumption of UHDR isoefficacy compared with CONV. However, the comparisons are primarily based on heterogeneous tumor growth assays with limited numbers of animals and short follow-up, and most studies do not assess long-term tumor control probability. Therefore, the assays may be insensitive in resolving smaller response differences, such as responses of radioresistant tumor subclones. Hence, tumor cure experiments, including additional TCD50 experiments, are needed to confirm the assumption of isoeffectiveness in curative settings.

The minimal FLASH sparing effect needed to compensate the increase of radiobiological damage due to hypofractionation for late-reacting tissues.

PURPOSE: Normal tissue (NT) sparing by ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) irradiations compared to conventional dose rate (CONV) irradiations while being isotoxic to the tumor has been termed "FLASH effect" and has been observed when large doses per fraction (d ≳ 5 Gy) have been delivered. Since hypofractionated treatment schedules are known to increase toxicities of late-reacting tissues compared to normofractionated schedules for many clinical scenarios at CONV dose rates, we developed a formalism based on the biologically effective dose (BED) to assess the minimum magnitude of the FLASH effect needed to compensate the loss of late-reacting NT sparing when reducing the number of fractions compared to a normofractionated CONV treatment schedule while remaining isoeffective to the tumor. METHODS: By requiring the same BED for the tumor, we derived the "break-even NT sparing weighting factor" WBE for the linear-quadratic (LQ) and LQ-linear (LQ-L) models for an NT region irradiated at a relative dose r (relative to the prescribed dose per fraction d to the tumor). WBE was evaluated numerically for multiple values of d and r, and for different tumor and NT α/ß-ratios. WBE was compared against currently available experimental data on the magnitude of the NT sparing provided by the FLASH effect for single fraction doses. RESULTS: For many clinically relevant scenarios, WBE decreases steeply initially for d > 2 Gy for late-reacting tissues with (α/ß)NT ≈ 3 Gy, implying that a significant NT sparing by the FLASH effect (between 15% and 30%) is required to counteract the increased radiobiological damage experienced by late-reacting NT for hypofractionated treatments with d < 10 Gy compared to normofractionated treatments that are equieffective to the tumor. When using the LQ model with generic α/ß-ratios for tumor and late-reacting NT of (α/ß)T  = 10 Gy and (α/ß)NT  = 3 Gy, respectively, most currently available experimental evidence about the magnitude of NT sparing by the FLASH effect suggests no net NT sparing benefit for hypofractionated FLASH radiotherapy (RT) in the high-dose region when compared with WBE . Instead, clinical indications with more similar α/ß-ratios of the tumor and dose-limiting NT toxicities [i.e., (α/ß)T  ≈ (α/ß)NT ], such as prostate treatments, are generally less penalized by hypofractionated treatments and need consequently smaller magnitudes of NT sparing by the FLASH effect to achieve a net benefit. For strongly hypofractionated treatments (>10-15 Gy/fraction), the LQ-L model predicts, unlike the LQ model, a larger WBE suggesting a possible benefit of strongly hypofractionated FLASH RT, even for generic α/ß-ratios of (α/ß)T  = 10 Gy and (α/ß)NT  = 3 Gy. However, knowledge on the isoeffect scaling for high doses per fraction (≳10 Gy/fraction) and its modeling is currently limited and impedes accurate and reliable predictions for such strongly hypofractionated treatments. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a formalism that quantifies the minimal NT sparing by the FLASH effect needed to compensate for hypofractionation, based on the LQ and LQ-L models. For a given hypofractionated UHDR treatment scenario and magnitude of the FLASH effect, the formalism predicts if a net NT sparing benefit is expected compared to a respective normofractionated CONV treatment.

FLASH radiotherapy treatment planning and models for electron beams.

The FLASH effect designates normal tissue sparing at ultra-high dose rate (UHDR, >40 Gy/s) compared to conventional dose rate (∼0.1 Gy/s) irradiation while maintaining tumour control and has the potential to improve the therapeutic ratio of radiotherapy (RT). UHDR high-energy electron (HEE, 4-20 MeV) beams are currently a mainstay for investigating the clinical potential of FLASH RT for superficial tumours. In the future very-high energy electron (VHEE, 50-250 MeV) UHDR beams may be used to treat deep-seated tumours. UHDR HEE treatment planning focused at its initial stage on accurate dosimetric modelling of converted and dedicated UHDR electron RT devices for the clinical transfer of FLASH RT. VHEE treatment planning demonstrated promising dosimetric performance compared to clinical photon RT techniques in silico and was used to evaluate and optimise the design of novel VHEE RT devices. Multiple metrics and models have been proposed for a quantitative description of the FLASH effect in treatment planning, but an improved experimental characterization and understanding of the FLASH effect is needed to allow for an accurate and validated modelling of the effect in treatment planning. The importance of treatment planning for electron FLASH RT will augment as the field moves forward to treat more complex clinical indications and target sites. In this review, TPS developments in HEE and VHEE are presented considering beam models, characteristics, and future FLASH applications.

Normal Tissue Sparing by FLASH as a Function of Single-Fraction Dose: A Quantitative Analysis.

PURPOSE: The FLASH effect designates normal tissue sparing by ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) compared with conventional dose rate irradiation without compromising tumor control. Understanding the magnitude of this effect and its dependency on dose are essential requirements for an optimized clinical translation of FLASH radiation therapy. In this context, we evaluated available experimental data on the magnitudes of normal tissue sparing provided by the FLASH effect as a function of dose, and followed a phenomenological data-driven approach for its parameterization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We gathered available in vivo data of normal tissue sparing of conventional (CONV) versus UHDR single-fraction doses and converted these to a common scale using isoeffect dose ratios, hereafter referred to as FLASH-modifying factors (FMF= (DCONV/DUHDR)|isoeffect). We then evaluated the suitability of a piecewise linear function with 2 pieces to parametrize FMF × DUHDR as a function of dose DUHDR. RESULTS: We found that the magnitude of FMF generally decreases (ie, sparing increases) as a function of single-fraction dose, and that individual data series can be described by the piecewise linear function. The sparing magnitude appears organ-specific, and pooled skin-reaction data followed a consistent trend as a function of dose. Average FMF values and their standard deviations were 0.95 ± 0.11 for all data <10 Gy, 0.92 ± 0.06 for mouse gut data between 10 and 25 Gy, and 0.96 ± 0.07 and 0.71 ± 0.06 for mammalian skin-reaction data between 10 and 25 Gy and >25 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of normal tissue sparing by FLASH increases with dose and is dependent on the irradiated tissue. A piecewise linear function can parameterize currently available individual data series.

Technical Note: Break-even dose level for hypofractionated treatment schedules.

PURPOSE: To derive the isodose line R relative to the prescription dose below which irradiated normal tissue (NT) regions benefit from a hypofractionated schedule with an isoeffective dose to the tumor. To apply the formalism to clinical case examples. METHODS: From the standard biologically effective dose (BED) equation based on the linear-quadratic (LQ) model, the BED of an NT that receives a relative proportion r of the prescribed dose per fraction for a given α/ß-ratio of the tumor, (α/ß)T , and NT, (α/ß)NT , is derived for different treatment schedules while keeping the BED to the tumor constant. Based on this, the "break-even" isodose line R is then derived. The BED of NT regions that receive doses below R decreases for more hypofractionated treatment schedules, and hence a lower risk for NT injury is predicted in these regions. To assess the impact of a linear behavior of BED for high doses per fraction (>6 Gy), we evaluated BED also using the LQ-linear (LQ-L) model. RESULTS: The formalism provides the equations to derive the BED of an NT as function of dose per fraction for an isoeffective dose to the tumor and the corresponding break-even isodose line R. For generic α/ß-ratios of (α/ß)T  = 10 Gy and (α/ß)NT  = 3 Gy and homogeneous dose in the target, R is 30%. R is doubling for stereotactic treatments for which tumor control correlates with the maximum dose of 100% instead of the encompassing isodose line of 50%. When using the LQ-L model, the notion of a break-even dose level R remains valid up to about 20 Gy per fraction for generic α/ß-ratios and D T = 2 ( α / ß ) . CONCLUSIONS: The formalism may be used to estimate below which relative isodose line R there will be a differential sparing of NT when increasing hypofractionation. More generally, it allows to assess changes of the therapeutic index for sets of isoeffective treatment schedules at different relative dose levels compared to a reference schedule in a compact manner.

Characteristics of very high-energy electron beams for the irradiation of deep-seated targets.

PURPOSE: Driven by advances in accelerator technology and the potential of exploiting the FLASH effect for the treatment of deep-seated targets (>5 cm), there is an active interest in the construction of devices to deliver very high-energy electron (VHEE) beams for radiation therapy. The application of novel VHEE devices, however, requires an assessment of the tradeoffs between the different beam parameter choices including beam energies, beam divergences, and maximal field sizes. This study systematically examines the dosimetric beam properties of VHEE beams, determining their clinical usefulness while marking their limits of applications for different beam configurations. METHODS: We performed Monte Carlo simulations of the dose distributions of electron beams for different energies (25-250 MeV), source-to-surface distances (SSD) (50 cm, 100 cm, parallel), and field sizes (2 cm2  × 2 cm2 to 15 cm2  × 15 cm2 ) in water using a research version of the RayStation treatment planning system (RaySearch Labs 9A IONPG). The beam was simulated using a monoenergetic point source and perfect collimation. Central axis percentage depth dose (PDD) and transverse dose profiles at multiple depths were evaluated and compared to those of MV photon beams. Profile characteristics including therapeutic range (TR) at 90%, proximal fall-off (PFO) at 90%, lateral penumbra (LP) at 90%-10%, and field width (FW) at 90% were obtained. RESULTS: Very high-energy electrons beams with SSD 100 cm and parallel beams (infinite SSD) exhibit a linear to near-linear increase of TR as a function of energy in the simulated energy range and reach values well beyond the typical depths of lesions encountered in clinics (<20 cm). Their TR show a marked field size dependence only for field sizes <10 cm2  × 10 cm2 . For VHEE beams with SSD 50 cm, TR are largely reduced (4-8 cm). For beam energies >150 MeV with large SSD (>100 cm), for many configurations, there is no substantial difference in PDD when adding an opposed beam. This may potentially reduce the number of VHEE beams needed for treatment by a factor of two compared to a treatment using lower energies and lower SSD. In order to cover deep-seated targets homogeneously, VHEE devices with a parallel beam must provide a maximum field size up to several centimeters larger than the tumor size. For the investigated diverging beams, there is not such a significant field width reduction with depth for larger fields as it is compensated by divergence. Penumbrae of VHEE beams are smaller than those of clinical MV photon beams for lower depths (<5 cm) but increase quickly for larger depths. There is only a relatively small dependence of penumbra on the SSD of the beam. CONCLUSIONS: The findings presented in this study assess the performance of VHEE beams and offer a first estimate of treatment indications and tradeoffs for a given design of a VHEE device. SSD >100 cm results in clinically more favorable PDD. Beam energies of 100 MeV and above are needed to cover common tumors (5-15 cm in-depth) conformally. Higher energies provide an additional benefit specifically for small and deep-seated lesions due to their reduced lateral penumbrae.

A GATE/Geant4 beam model for the MedAustron non-isocentric proton treatment plans quality assurance.

PURPOSE: To present a reference Monte Carlo (MC) beam model developed in GATE/Geant4 for the MedAustron fixed beam line. The proposed model includes an absolute dose calibration in Dose-Area-Product (DAP) and it has been validated within clinical tolerances for non-isocentric treatments as routinely performed at MedAustron. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The proton beam model was parametrized at the nozzle entrance considering optic and energy properties of the pencil beam. The calibration in terms of absorbed dose to water was performed exploiting the relationship between number of particles and DAP by mean of a recent formalism. Typical longitudinal dose distribution parameters (range, distal penumbra and modulation) and transverse dose distribution parameters (spot sizes, field sizes and lateral penumbra) were evaluated. The model was validated in water, considering regular-shaped dose distribution as well as clinical plans delivered in non-isocentric conditions. RESULTS: Simulated parameters agree with measurements within the clinical requirements at different air gaps. The agreement of distal and longitudinal dose distribution parameters is mostly better than 1 mm. The dose difference in reference conditions and for 3D dose delivery in water is within 0.5% and 1.2%, respectively. Clinical plans were reproduced within 3%. CONCLUSION: A full nozzle beam model for active scanning proton pencil beam is described using GATE/Geant4. Absolute dose calibration based on DAP formalism was implemented. The beam model is fully validated in water over a wide range of clinical scenarios and will be inserted as a reference tool for research and for independent dose calculation in the clinical routine.

Development and Validation of Single Field Multi-Ion Particle Therapy Treatments.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate combined ion-beam with constant relative biological effectiveness (RBE) (CICR) particle therapy in single field arrangements for improved treatment efficacy, robustness, and normal tissue sparing. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The PRECISE (PaRticle thErapy using single and Combined Ion optimization StratEgies) treatment planning system was developed to investigate clinical viability of CICR treatments. Single-field uniform dose (SFUD) with a single ion (proton [p], helium [He], or carbon [C]) and CICR (C-p and C-He) treatments were generated for 3 patient cases with a clinically prescribed dose of 3 Gy (RBE) per fraction. Spread-out Bragg peak plans were irradiated in homogenous and clinical-like settings using an anthropomorphic head phantom. A dosimetric and biological verification of CICRC-p treatments using a murine glioma cell line (GL261) was performed. RESULTS: CICR treatment plans for the 3 patients presented highly uniform physical dose while reducing high dose-averaged linear energy transfer gradients compared with carbon ions alone. When considering uncertainty in tissue parameter (α/ß)x assignment and RBE modeling, the CICRC-p treatment exhibited enhanced biophysical stability within the target volume, similar to protons alone. CICR treatments reduced dose to normal tissue surrounding the target, exhibiting similar or improved dosimetric features compared with SFUDHe. For both CICRC-p and SFUD treatments, measurements verified the planned dose in the target within ∼3%. Planned versus measured target RBE values were 1.38 ± 0.02 and 1.39 ± 0.07 (<1% deviation), respectively, for the CICRC-p treatment in heterogenous settings. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we demonstrate that by combining 2 (or more) ions in a single field arrangement, more robust biological and more conformal dose distributions can be delivered compared with conventional particle therapy treatment planning. This work constitutes the first dosimetric and biological verification of multi-ion particle therapy in homogeneous as well as heterogenous settings.

Biophysical modeling and experimental validation of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for 4He ion beam therapy.

BACKGROUND: Helium (4He) ion beam therapy provides favorable biophysical characteristics compared to currently administered particle therapies, i.e., reduced lateral scattering and enhanced biological damage to deep-seated tumors like heavier ions, while simultaneously lessened particle fragmentation in distal healthy tissues as observed with lighter protons. Despite these biophysical advantages, raster-scanning 4He ion therapy remains poorly explored e.g., clinical translational is hampered by the lack of reliable and robust estimation of physical and radiobiological uncertainties. Therefore, prior to the upcoming 4He ion therapy program at the Heidelberg Ion-beam Therapy Center (HIT), we aimed to characterize the biophysical phenomena of 4He ion beams and various aspects of the associated models for clinical integration. METHODS: Characterization of biological effect for 4He ion beams was performed in both homogenous and patient-like treatment scenarios using innovative models for estimation of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in silico and their experimental validation using clonogenic cell survival as the gold-standard surrogate. Towards translation of RBE models in patients, the first GPU-based treatment planning system (non-commercial) for raster-scanning 4He ion beams was devised in-house (FRoG). RESULTS: Our data indicate clinically relevant uncertainty of ±5-10% across different model simulations, highlighting their distinct biological and computational methodologies. The in vitro surrogate for highly radio-resistant tissues presented large RBE variability and uncertainty within the clinical dose range. CONCLUSIONS: Existing phenomenological and mechanistic/biophysical models were successfully integrated and validated in both Monte Carlo and GPU-accelerated analytical platforms against in vitro experiments, and tested using pristine peaks and clinical fields in highly radio-resistant tissues where models exhibit the greatest RBE uncertainty. Together, these efforts mark an important step towards clinical translation of raster-scanning 4He ion beam therapy to the clinic.