Electron FLASH Delivery at Treatment Room Isocenter for Efficient Reversible Conversion of a Clinical LINAC.
Journal
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics
ISSN: 1879-355X
Titre abrégé: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7603616
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2021
01 07 2021
Historique:
received:
21
08
2020
revised:
02
12
2020
accepted:
07
01
2021
pubmed:
15
1
2021
medline:
24
9
2021
entrez:
14
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In this study, procedures were developed to achieve efficient reversible conversion of a clinical linear accelerator (LINAC) and deliver ultrahigh-dose-rate (UHDR) electron or conventional beams to the treatment room isocenter for FLASH radiation therapy. The LINAC was converted to deliver UHDR beam within 20 minutes by retracting the x-ray target from the beam's path, positioning the carousel on an empty port, and selecting 10 MV photon beam energy in the treatment console. Dose rate surface and depth dose profiles were measured in solid water phantom at different field sizes with Gafchromic film and an optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD). A pulse controller counted the pulses via scattered radiation signal and gated the delivery for a preset pulse count. A fast photomultiplier tube-based Cherenkov detector measured the per pulse beam output at a 2-ns sampling rate. After conversion back to clinical mode, conventional beam output, flatness, symmetry, field size, and energy were measured for all clinically commissioned energies. The surface average dose rates at the isocenter for 1-cm diameter and 1.5-in diameter circular fields and for a jaws-wide-open field were 238 ± 5 Gy/s, 262 ± 5 Gy/s, and 290 ± 5 Gy/s, respectively. The radial symmetry of the beams was within 2.4%, 0.5%, and 0.2%, respectively. The doses from simultaneous irradiation of film and OSLD were within 1%. The photomultiplier tube showed the LINAC required ramp up time in the first 4 to 6 pulses before the output stabilized, after which its stability was within 3%. At the isocenter of the treatment room, 10 MeV UHDR beams were achieved. The beam output was reproducible but requires further investigation of the ramp up time, equivalent to ∼1 Gy, requiring dose monitoring. The UHDR beam can irradiate both small and large subjects to investigate potential FLASH radiobiological effects in minimally modified clinical settings, and the dose rate can be further increased by reducing the source-to-surface distance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33444695
pii: S0360-3016(21)00024-9
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.01.011
pmc: PMC10416223
mid: NIHMS1915985
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
872-882Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA023108
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB024498
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:11-17
pubmed: 31253466
Med Phys. 2019 Feb;46(2):1044-1048
pubmed: 30488442
Cancer Radiother. 2015 Oct;19(6-7):526-31
pubmed: 26277238
Sci Transl Med. 2014 Jul 16;6(245):245ra93
pubmed: 25031268
Med Phys. 2018 Feb;45(2):863-874
pubmed: 29206287
Med Phys. 1985 Nov-Dec;12(6):779-84
pubmed: 4079871
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:18-22
pubmed: 31303340
Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Jan 1;25(1):35-42
pubmed: 29875213
Med Phys. 2012 May;39(5):2447-55
pubmed: 22559615
Med Phys. 2019 Sep;46(9):4246-4256
pubmed: 31297824
Med Phys. 2017 Feb;44(2):725-735
pubmed: 28019660
Front Oncol. 2020 Jan 17;9:1563
pubmed: 32010633
Radiother Oncol. 2018 Dec;129(3):582-588
pubmed: 30177374
Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med. 1971;19(5):479-83
pubmed: 5314348
J Med Phys. 2011 Jul;36(3):123-5
pubmed: 21897556
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Nov 1;102(3):619-626
pubmed: 30017793
Med Phys. 2016 Feb;43(2):643-9
pubmed: 26843228
Med Phys. 2012 Oct;39(10):6339-50
pubmed: 23039670
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Mar 15;63(6):065007
pubmed: 29474189
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Jan 1;97(1):195-203
pubmed: 27816362
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020 Dec;21(12):314-324
pubmed: 33155768
Phys Med Biol. 2001 May;46(5):1391-7
pubmed: 11384060
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:51-55
pubmed: 30850209
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 May 28;116(22):10943-10951
pubmed: 31097580
Med Phys. 2009 Sep;36(9):4197-212
pubmed: 19810494
Phys Med Biol. 1987 Jun;32(6):761-8
pubmed: 3615578
Med Dosim. 2009 Spring;34(1):51-6
pubmed: 19181256
Med Phys. 2019 Dec;46(12):5690-5695
pubmed: 31600830
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Sep;124(3):365-369
pubmed: 28545957
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:40-45
pubmed: 30755324
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015 May 08;16(3):5139
pubmed: 26103478
Med Phys. 2020 Sep;47(9):4348-4355
pubmed: 32452558
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020 Feb 1;106(2):440-448
pubmed: 31928642
Nature. 1966 Apr 9;210(5032):212-3
pubmed: 5962093
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:56-61
pubmed: 31307824
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:4-10
pubmed: 31253467