Nanoscale dosimetry for a radioisotope-labeled metal nanoparticle using MCNP6.2 and Geant4.
Monte Carlo simulation
dose enhancement
metal nanoparticle
nanodosimetry
radioisotopes
Journal
Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Sep 2024
03 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
16
07
2024
received:
27
04
2024
accepted:
27
07
2024
medline:
3
9
2024
pubmed:
3
9
2024
entrez:
3
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Metal nanoparticles (MNPs) labeled with radioisotopes (RIs) are utilized as radio-enhancers due to their ability to amplify the radiation dose in their immediate vicinity. A thorough understanding of nanoscale dosimetry around MNPs enables their effective application in radiotherapy. However, nanoscale dosimetry around MNPs still requires further investigation. This study aims to provide insight into the radio-enhancement effects of MNPs by elucidating nanoscale dosimetry surrounding MNPs labeled with Auger-emitting RIs. We particularly focus on distinguishing the respective dose contributions of photons and electrons emitted by Auger-emitting RIs in the context of dose enhancement. A 50 nm diameter NP of silver (Ag) core and gold (Au) shell (Ag@Au NP) was assumed to emit mono-energetic electrons and photons (3, 5, 10, 20, and 30 keV), or the energy spectrum corresponding to one of three Auger-emitting RIs ( The radial doses of 10, 20, and 30 keV electrons estimated by both codes were comparable. However, the radial doses of 3 and 5 keV electrons by MCNP6.2 were much larger near the NP surface than those by Geant4. There was a dose enhancement of a few % to tens % by the Au shell in the region of the NP surface to 10 µm, depending on the electron energy. The radial doses of photons with the Au shell were higher up to their secondary electron ranges than those without the Au shell. The maximum dose enhancement factor of photons occurred at 20 keV and was 63.4 by MCNP6.2 and 50.5 by Geant4. The overall radial doses of electrons were 1-2 orders of magnitude larger than those of photons. As a result, in cases of RIs emitting both electrons and photons, the radial doses up to electron ranges were dominantly governed by electrons. The dose enhancement estimated by both codes for the RIs ranged from a few % except in the immediate vicinity of the NP surface. Given the dominant contribution of electrons to radial doses of MNP labeled with Auger-emitting RIs, physical dose enhancement expected by interactions with photons was hindered. Since there are no available RIs emitting exclusively photons, achieving enhanced physical doses within a cell through a combination of MNPs and RIs appears currently unattainable. The radial doses of photons near the NP surface exhibited considerable discrepancies between the codes, primarily attributed to low-energy electrons. The difference may arise from higher cross-sections of Au inelastic scattering in Geant4-DNA-Au compared to MCNP6.2.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Metal nanoparticles (MNPs) labeled with radioisotopes (RIs) are utilized as radio-enhancers due to their ability to amplify the radiation dose in their immediate vicinity. A thorough understanding of nanoscale dosimetry around MNPs enables their effective application in radiotherapy. However, nanoscale dosimetry around MNPs still requires further investigation.
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to provide insight into the radio-enhancement effects of MNPs by elucidating nanoscale dosimetry surrounding MNPs labeled with Auger-emitting RIs. We particularly focus on distinguishing the respective dose contributions of photons and electrons emitted by Auger-emitting RIs in the context of dose enhancement.
METHODS
METHODS
A 50 nm diameter NP of silver (Ag) core and gold (Au) shell (Ag@Au NP) was assumed to emit mono-energetic electrons and photons (3, 5, 10, 20, and 30 keV), or the energy spectrum corresponding to one of three Auger-emitting RIs (
RESULTS
RESULTS
The radial doses of 10, 20, and 30 keV electrons estimated by both codes were comparable. However, the radial doses of 3 and 5 keV electrons by MCNP6.2 were much larger near the NP surface than those by Geant4. There was a dose enhancement of a few % to tens % by the Au shell in the region of the NP surface to 10 µm, depending on the electron energy. The radial doses of photons with the Au shell were higher up to their secondary electron ranges than those without the Au shell. The maximum dose enhancement factor of photons occurred at 20 keV and was 63.4 by MCNP6.2 and 50.5 by Geant4. The overall radial doses of electrons were 1-2 orders of magnitude larger than those of photons. As a result, in cases of RIs emitting both electrons and photons, the radial doses up to electron ranges were dominantly governed by electrons. The dose enhancement estimated by both codes for the RIs ranged from a few % except in the immediate vicinity of the NP surface.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Given the dominant contribution of electrons to radial doses of MNP labeled with Auger-emitting RIs, physical dose enhancement expected by interactions with photons was hindered. Since there are no available RIs emitting exclusively photons, achieving enhanced physical doses within a cell through a combination of MNPs and RIs appears currently unattainable. The radial doses of photons near the NP surface exhibited considerable discrepancies between the codes, primarily attributed to low-energy electrons. The difference may arise from higher cross-sections of Au inelastic scattering in Geant4-DNA-Au compared to MCNP6.2.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : National Research Foundation of Korea
Organisme : Korea government (MSIT)
ID : RS-2023-00237149
Organisme : Ministry of Education
ID : 2022R1A6A1A03063039
Informations de copyright
© 2024 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
De Ruysscher D, Niedermann G, Burnet NG, Siva S, Lee AW, Hegi‐Johnson F. Radiotherapy toxicity. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019;5(1):13.
Rosenblatt E, Zubizarreta E. Radiotherapy in Cancer Care: Facing the Global Challenge. International Atomic Energy Agency; 2017.
Koka K, Verma A, Dwarakanath BS, Papineni RV. Technological advancements in external beam radiation therapy (EBRT): an indispensable tool for cancer treatment. Cancer Manag Res. 2022;14:1421‐1429.
Bonvalot S, Le Pechoux C, De Baere T, et al. First‐in‐human study testing a new radioenhancer using nanoparticles (NBTXR3) activated by radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced soft tissue sarcomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(4):908‐917.
Schuemann J, Bagley AF, Berbeco R, et al. Roadmap for metal nanoparticles in radiation therapy: current status, translational challenges, and future directions. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65(21):21RM02.
Martinov MP, Fletcher EM, Thomson RM. Multiscale Monte Carlo simulations of gold nanoparticle dose‐enhanced radiotherapy I: cellular dose enhancement in microscopic models. Med Phys. 2023;50(9):5853‐5864.
Martinov MP, Fletcher EM, Thomson RM. Multiscale Monte Carlo simulations of gold nanoparticle dose‐enhanced radiotherapy II. Cellular dose enhancement within macroscopic tumor models. Med Phys. 2023;50(9):5842‐5852.
Kuncic Z, Lacombe S. Nanoparticle radio‐enhancement: principles, progress and application to cancer treatment. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63(2):02TR01.
Hainfeld JF, Dilmanian FA, Slatkin DN, Smilowitz HM. Radiotherapy enhancement with gold nanoparticles. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2008;60(8):977‐985.
Chandrakala V, Aruna V, Angajala G. Review on metal nanoparticles as nanocarriers: current challenges and perspectives in drug delivery systems. Emergent Mater. 2022;5(6):1593‐1615.
Schuemann J, Berbeco R, Chithrani DB, et al. Roadmap to clinical use of gold nanoparticles for radiation sensitization. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94(1):189‐205.
Gray TM, David S, Bassiri N, Patel DY, Kirby N, Mayer KM. Microdosimetric and radiobiological effects of gold nanoparticles at therapeutic radiation energies. Int J Radiat Biol. 2023;99(2):308‐317.
Mansouri E, Mesbahi A, Malekzadeh R, Mansouri A. Shielding characteristics of nanocomposites for protection against X‐and gamma rays in medical applications: effect of particle size, photon energy and nano‐particle concentration. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2020;59:583‐600.
Bae C, Hernández Millares R, Ryu S, et al. Synergistic effect of ferroptosis‐inducing nanoparticles and x‐ray irradiation combination therapy. Small. 2024;20(19):2310873.
Jones BL, Krishnan S, Cho SH. Estimation of microscopic dose enhancement factor around gold nanoparticles by Monte Carlo calculations. Med Phys. 2010;37(7):3809‐3816. Pt 1.
Butterworth KT, McMahon SJ, Currell FJ, Prise KM. Physical basis and biological mechanisms of gold nanoparticle radiosensitization. Nanoscale. 2012;4(16):4830‐4838.
Jung S, Sung W, Ye S‐J. Pinhole x‐ray fluorescence imaging of gadolinium and gold nanoparticles using polychromatic x‐rays: a Monte Carlo study. Int J Nanomedicine. 2017;12:5805‐5817.
Kim T, Lee WS, Jeon M, et al. Dual imaging modality of fluorescence and transmission x‐rays for gold nanoparticle‐injected living mice. Med Phys. 2023;50(1):529‐539.
Rahman WN, Corde S, Yagi N, Abdul Aziz SA, Annabell N, Geso M. Optimal energy for cell radiosensitivity enhancement by gold nanoparticles using synchrotron‐based monoenergetic photon beams. Int J Nanomedicine. 2014;9:2459‐2467.
Hernández Millares R, Bae C, Kim S‐J, et al. Clonogenic assay and computational modeling using real cell images to study physical enhancement and cellular sensitization induced by metal nanoparticles under MV and kV x‐ray irradiation. Nanoscale. 2024;16:7110‐7122.
Laprise‐Pelletier M, Lagueux J, Côté MF, LaGrange T, Fortin MA. Low‐dose prostate cancer brachytherapy with radioactive palladium–gold nanoparticles. Adv Healthc Mater. 2017;6(4):1601120.
Laprise‐Pelletier M, Ma Y, Lagueux J, Cote MF, Beaulieu L, Fortin MA. Intratumoral injection of low‐energy photon‐emitting gold nanoparticles: a microdosimetric Monte Carlo‐based model. ACS Nano. 2018;12(3):2482‐2497.
Rosenkranz AA, Slastnikova TA, Durymanov MO, Georgiev GP, Sobolev AS. Exploiting active nuclear import for efficient delivery of Auger electron emitters into the cell nucleus. Int J Radiat Biol. 2023;99(1):28‐38.
Murphy MK, Piper RK, Greenwood LR, et al. Evaluation of the new cesium‐131 seed for use in low‐energy x‐ray brachytherapy. Med Phys. 2004;31(6):1529‐1538.
Luo W, Molloy J, Aryal P, Feddock J, Randall M. Determination of prescription dose for Cs‐131 permanent implants using the BED formalism including resensitization correction. Med Phys. 2014;41(2):024101.
Lesperance M, Martinov M, Thomson RM. Monte Carlo dosimetry for 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs ocular brachytherapy with various plaque models using an eye phantom. Med Phys. 2014;41(3):031706.
Hernández Millares R, Mirza JA, Lee J, Choi K, Eom M, Ye S‐J. Radiosensitization by Au‐nanofilm at micrometer level using confocal Raman spectroscopy. Med Phys. 2021;48(2):796‐804.
Jung S, Sung W, Ye S‐J. Low‐energy electron dose‐point kernels and radial dose distributions around gold nanoparticles: comparison between MCNP6.1, PENELOPE2014 and Geant4‐DNA. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B. 2018;430:18‐22.
Gholami YH, Maschmeyer R, Kuncic Z. Radio‐enhancement effects by radiolabeled nanoparticles. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):14346.
Sung W, Jung S, Ye S‐J. Evaluation of the microscopic dose enhancement for nanoparticle‐enhanced Auger therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(21):7522‐7535.
Pijeira MSO, Viltres H, Kozempel J, et al. Radiolabeled nanomaterials for biomedical applications: radiopharmacy in the era of nanotechnology. EJNMMI Radiopharm Chem. 2022;7(1):8.
Karpov TE, Muslimov AR, Antuganov DO, et al. Impact of metallic coating on the retention of 225Ac and its daugthers within core–shell nanocarriers. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2022;608(3):2571‐2583.
Snow R, McIntire G, Bacon E, Gustow E, inventor; Amersham, PLC, Little Chalfont, assignee. Method of coating a metal substrate with a radioactive layer. United States patent US 6596097 B1. 2003 Jul 22.
Chithrani DB, Ghazani AA, Chan WC. Determining the size and shape dependence of gold nanoparticle uptake into mammalian cells. Nano Lett. 2006;6(4):662‐668.
Yue J, Feliciano TJ, Li W, Lee A, Odom TW. Gold nanoparticle size and shape effects on cellular uptake and intracellular distribution of siRNA nanoconstructs. Bioconjug Chem. 2017;28(6):1791‐1800.
Cullen DE. EPICS2014: Electron Photon Interaction Cross‐sections (Version 2014). IAEANDS‐218; 2014.
Perkins ST, Cullen DE, Seltzer SM. Tables and Graphs of Electron‐Interaction Cross‐sections from 10 eV to 100 GeV Derived from the LLNL Evaluated Electron Data Library (EEDL), Z = 1–100. UCRL‐50400; 1991.
Cullen DE, Hubbel JH, Kissel L. EPDL97: The Evaluated Photon Data Library. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; 1997. UCRL‐50400.
Perkins ST, Cullen DE, Chen MH, Hubbel JH, Rathkopf J, Scofield J. Tables and Graphs of Atomic Subshell and Relaxation Data Derived from the LLNL Evaluated Atomic Data Library (EADL), Z = 1–100. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; 1991. UCRL‐50400.
Agostinelli S, Allison J, Amako K, et al. GEANT4—a simulation toolkit. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A. 2016;506(3):250‐303.
Incerti S, Baldacchino G, Bernal M, et al. The geant4‐dna project. Int J Model Simul Sci Comput. 2010;1(02):157‐178.
Incerti S, Kyriakou I, Bernal MA, et al. Geant4‐DNA example applications for track structure simulations in liquid water: a report from the Geant4‐DNA Project. Med Phys. 2018;45(8):e722‐e739.
Bernal MA, Bordage MC, Brown JMC, et al. Track structure modeling in liquid water: a review of the Geant4‐DNA very low energy extension of the Geant4 Monte Carlo simulation toolkit. Phys Med. 2015;31(8):861‐874.
Incerti S, Ivanchenko A, Karamitros M, et al. Comparison of GEANT4 very low energy cross‐section models with experimental data in water. Med Phys. 2010;37(9):4692‐4708.
Sakata D, Incerti S, Bordage MC, et al. An implementation of discrete electron transport models for gold in the Geant4 simulation toolkit. J Appl Phys. 2016;120(24):244901.
Quinn JJ. Range of excited electrons in metals. Phys Rev. 1962;126(4):1453.
Sakata D, Kyriakou I, Okada S, et al. Geant4‐DNA track‐structure simulations for gold nanoparticles: the importance of electron discrete models in nanometer volumes. Med Phys. 2018;45(5):2230‐2242.
Verpelli M, Vrapcenjak L. LiveChart of nuclides. IAEA. Nuclear Data Section. 2020. Accessed June 14, 2023 https://www‐nds.iaea.org/livechart/
Plante I, Cucinotta FA. Cross‐sections for the interactions of 1 eV–100 MeV electrons in liquid water and application to Monte‐Carlo simulation of HZE radiation tracks. New J Phys. 2009;11(6):063047.
Pianetta P. 3.2 Low‐Energy Electron Ranges in Matter. X‐Ray Data Booklet. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; 1986.
Parsons DK. Some Notes on EPRDATA and MCNP. Los Alamos National Lab; 2022. LA‐UR‐22‐27131.
Sakata D, Kyriakou I, Tran HN, et al. Electron track structure simulations in a gold nanoparticle using Geant4‐DNA. Phys Med. 2019;63:98‐104.
Thomson RM, Kawrakow I. On the Monte Carlo simulation of electron transport in the sub‐1 keV energy range. Med Phys. 2011;38(8):4531‐4534.
Williams GP. 1.1 Electron Binding Energies. X‐Ray Data Booklet. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; 2009.
Hashemi S, Aghamiri MR, Kahani M, Jaberi R. Investigation of gold nanoparticle effects in brachytherapy by an electron emitter ophthalmic plaque. Int J Nanomedicine. 2019;14:4157‐4165.