Advertisement

Spinal cord re-treatments using photon and proton based radiotherapy: LQ-derived tolerance doses

  • B. Jones
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: CRUK-MRC Oxford Centre, Gray Laboratory, Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Old Road Research Campus Research Building, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7DQ, United Kingdom.
    Affiliations
    CRUK-MRC Oxford Centre, Gray Laboratory, Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Old Road Research Campus Research Building, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7DQ, United Kingdom

    Green Templeton College, University of Oxford, 43 Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6HG, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • J.W. Hopewell
    Affiliations
    Green Templeton College, University of Oxford, 43 Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6HG, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
Published:April 13, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.04.005

      Highlights

      • The use of a graphical user interface (GUI) for estimation of retreatment dose-fractionation limits in the CNS.
      • Worked examples are given for various photon re-treatment scenarios.
      • The system is extended to include proton beam examples.

      Abstract

      Re-treatment, using megavoltage photon radiotherapy, can benefit carefully selected patients with new or recurrent tumours. Such re-treatments may involve the further exposure of tissues such as the brain or spinal cord.
      A time-dependent model has been developed, which incorporates data from all published radiobiological experiments concerned with the in vivo re-irradiation of the spinal cord using photons. It allows an estimation of the increasing recovery in tissue tolerance with elapsed time after the initial treatment course. In accordance with the experimental evidence, the recovery rate depends on the biological effective dose (BED) of the initial treatment. Various degrees of conservatism have been introduced in the model to allow for potential changes in CNS tissue tolerance due to patient age, chemotherapy, surgery etc.
      An estimation of the re-treatment dose-fractionation schedule is made easier by the use of a downloadable Graphical User Interface (GUI). Worked examples of its use are given for conventional photon (X-ray) based treatments, and also for protons, where relative biological effectiveness (RBE) considerations must be respected within the BED estimates. The model provides boundary conditions for clinical practice. The responsible clinician can choose to use more ‘forgiving’ BED values and from this to calculate the re-irradiation dose-fractionation schedule.
      For protons, greater care is required since the inter-relationship between linear energy transfer (LET) and RBE can lead to significant over-dosage relative to accepted CNS tolerance doses, especially with the use of scanned proton beams. LET and RBE factors are important in order to deliver safe and effective re-treatment doses.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Jones B.
        • Grant W.
        Retreatment of central nervous system tumours.
        Clinl Oncol. 2014; 6: 407-418
        • Jones B.
        • Hopewell J.W.
        Alternative models for estimating the radiotherapy retreatment dose for the spinal cord.
        Int J Radiat Biol. 2014; 90: 731-741
        • Woolley T.E.
        • Belmonte-Beitia J.
        • Calvo G.F.
        • Hopewell J.W.
        • Gaffney E.A.
        • Jones B.
        Changes in the retreatment radiation tolerance of the spinal cord with time after the initial treatment.
        Int J Radiat Biol. 2018; 94: 515-531
        • Calugaru V.
        • Nauraye C.
        • Noel G.
        • Giocanti N.
        • Favaudon V.
        • Megnin-Chanet F.
        Radiobiological characterization of two therapeutic proton beams with different initial energy spectra used at the Institut Curie Proton Therapy Center in Orsay.
        Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2011; 81: 1136-1143
        • Britten R.A.
        • Nazaryan V.
        • Davis L.K.
        • Klein S.B.
        • Nichiporov D.
        • Mendonca M.S.
        • et al.
        Variations in the RBE for cell killing along the depth-dose profile of a modulated proton therapy beam.
        Rad Res. 2013; 179: 21-28
        • Jones B.
        • McMahon S.J.
        • Prise K.M.
        The Radiobiology of Proton Therapy: Challenges and opportunities around relative biological effectiveness.
        Clin Oncol. 2018; 30: 285-292
      1. Jones B. Chapter 1 in ‘Practical Radiobiology for Proton Therapy planning’, Institute of Physics Publishing (Bristol & Philadelphia), 2017. ISBN 978-0-7503-1338-4 or 978-0-7503-1339-1.

        • Rørvik E.
        • Fjæra L.F.
        • Dahle T.J.
        • Dale E.
        • Engeseth G.M.
        • Stokkevåg C.H.
        • et al.
        Exploration and application of phenomenological RBE models for proton therapy.
        Phys Med Biol. 2018; 63185013https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aad9db
        • Jones B.
        Towards achieving the full clinical potential of proton therapy by inclusion of LET and RBE Models.
        Cancers. 2015; 7: 460-480
        • Jones B.
        A simpler energy transfer efficiency model to predict relative biological effect (RBE) for Protons and Heavier Ions.
        Front Oncol. 2015; 5 (Erratum Front Oncol. 2016;6:32. https://doi:10.3389/fonc.2016.00032): 184https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2015.00184
        • Jones B.
        Clinical radiobiology of proton therapy: modeling of RBE.
        Acta Oncol. 2017; 56: 1374-1378
      2. Jones B. Chapters 8 & 9 in ‘Practical Radiobiology for Proton Therapy planning’, Institute of Physics Publishing (Bristol & Philadelphia), 2017. ISBN 978-0-7503-1338-4 or 978-0-7503-1339-1.

        • Belli M.
        • Bettega D.
        • Calzolari P.
        • Cera F.
        • Cherubini R.
        • Dalla Vecchia M.
        • et al.
        Inactivation of human normal and tumour cells irradiated with low energy protons.
        Int J Radiat Biol. 2000; 76: 831-839
        • Grassberger C.
        • Trofimov A.
        • Lomax A.
        Paganetti H. Variations in linear energy transfer within clinical proton therapy fields and the potential for biological treatment planning.
        Int J Radiat Oncol. Biol, Phys. 2011; 80: 1559-1566
      3. Jones B. Chapters 2 in ‘Practical Radiobiology for Proton Therapy planning’, Institute of Physics Publishing (Bristol & Philadelphia), 2017. ISBN 978-0-7503-1338-4 or 978-0-7503-1339-1.

        • Jones B.
        • Hopewell J.W.
        Modelling the influence of treatment time on the biological effectiveness of single radiosurgery treatments: Derivation of ‘protective’ dose modification factors.
        Brit J Radiol. 2018; 92: 20180111https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180111
        • Dale R.G.
        • Hendry J.H.
        • Jones B.
        • Deehan C.
        • Sinclair J.A.
        Practical methods for compensating for missed treatment days in radiotherapy, with particular reference to head & neck schedules.
        Clin Oncol. 2002; 14: 382-393
        • Jones B.
        • Dale R.G.
        The evolution of practical radiobiological modelling.
        Brit J Radiol. 2019; 92: 20180097https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180097
        • Jones B.
        Why RBE must be a variable and not a constant in proton therapy.
        Brit J Radiol. 2016; 89: 20160116https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20160116
        • Jones B.
        • Dale R.G.
        The evolution of practical radiobiological modelling.
        Brit J Radiol. 2018; 92https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180097
        • Muirhead R.
        • Jones B.
        Re-irradiation is now a real option – But how do we take it forward?.
        Clin Oncol. 2018; 30: 65-66