Search

Purpose We present the nanoCluE model, which uses nano- and microdosimetric quantities to model RBE for protons and carbon ions. Under the hypothesis that nano- and microdosimetric quantities correlates with the generation of complex DNA double strand breakes, we wish to investigate whether an improved accuracy in predicting LQ parameters may be achieved, compared to some of the published RBE models. Methods The model is based on experimental LQ data for protons and carbon ions. We generated a database of track structure data for a number of proton and carbon ion kinetic energies with the Geant4-DNA Monte Carlo code. These data were used to obtain both a nanodosimetric quantity and a set of microdosimetric quantities. The latter were tested with different parameterizations versus experimental LQ-data to select the variable and parametrization that yielded the best fit. Results For protons, the nanoCluE model yielded, for the ratio of the linear LQ term versus the test data, a root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.57 compared to 1.31 and 1.30 for two earlier other published proton models. For carbon ions the RMSE was 2.26 compared to 3.24 and 5.24 for earlier published carbon ion models. Conclusion These results demonstrate the feasibility of the nanoCluE RBE model for carbon ions and protons. The increased accuracy for carbon ions as compared to two other considered models warrants further investigation.

Purpose We propose the use of proton track-end objectives in intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) optimization to reduce the linear energy transfer (LET) and the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in critical structures. Methods and Materials IMPT plans were generated for 3 intracranial patient cases (1.8 Gy (RBE) in 30 fractions) and 3 head-and-neck patient cases (2 Gy (RBE) in 35 fractions), assuming a constant RBE of 1.1. Two plans were generated for each patient: (1) physical dose objectives only (DOSEopt) and (2) same dose objectives as the DOSEopt plan, with additional proton track-end objectives (TEopt). The track-end objectives penalized protons stopping in the risk volume of choice. Dose evaluations were made using a RBE of 1.1 and the LET-dependent Wedenberg RBE model, together with estimates of normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs). In addition, the distributions of proton track-ends and dose-average LET (LETd) were analyzed. Results The TEopt plans reduced the mean LETd in the critical structures studied by an average of 37% and increased the mean LETd in the primary clinical target volume (CTV) by an average of 23%. This was achieved through a redistribution of the proton track-ends, concurrently keeping the physical dose distribution virtually unchanged compared to the DOSEopt plans. This resulted in substantial RBE-weighted dose (DRBE) reductions, allowing the TEopt plans to meet all clinical goals for both RBE models and reduce the NTCPs by 0 to 19 percentage points compared to the DOSEopt plans, assuming the Wedenberg RBE model. The DOSEopt plans met all clinical goals assuming a RBE of 1.1 but failed 10 of 19 normal tissue goals assuming the Wedenberg RBE model. Conclusions Proton track-end objectives allow for LETd reductions in critical structures without compromising the physical target dose. This approach permits the lowering of DRBE and NTCP in critical structures, independent of the variable RBE model used, and it could be introduced in clinical practice without changing current protocols based on the constant RBE of 1.1.

The objective of this study was to examine the use of proton pencil beam scanning for the treatment of moving lung tumors. A single-field uniform dose proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) plan was generated for the standard thorax phantom designed by the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) Houston QA Center. Robust optimization, including range and setup uncertainties as well as volumetric repainting, was used for the plan. Patient-specific quality assurance (QA) measurements were performed using both a water tank and a custom heterogeneous QA phantom. A custom moving phantom was used to find the optimal number of volumetric repainting. Both analytical and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms were used for dose calculation and their accuracies were compared with actual measurements. A single ionization chamber, a 2-dimensional ionization chamber array, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), and films were used for dose measurements. The optimal number of volumetric repainting was found to be 4 times in our system. The mean dose overestimations on a moving target by analytical and MC algorithms based on a time-averaged computed tomography (CT) image of the phantom were found to be 4.8% and 2.4%, respectively. The mean gamma indexes for analytical and MC algorithms were 91% and 96%, respectively. The MC dose algorithm calculation was found to have a better agreement with measurements compared with the analytical algorithm. When treating moving lung tumors using proton PBS, the techniques of robust optimization, volumetric repainting, and MC dose calculation were found effective. Extra care needs to be taken when an analytical dose calculation algorithm is used.

Radiation therapy is widely used for treatments of malignant diseases. The search for the optimal radiation treatment approach for a specific case is a complex task, ultimately seeking to maximise ...

In a number of recent articles in this journal F. Cardone and collaborators have claimed the observation of several striking nuclear phenomena which they attribute to “piezonuclear reactions”. One such claim [F. Cardone, R. Mignani, A. Petrucci, Phys. Lett. A 373 (2009) 1956] is that subjecting a solution of 228Th to cavitation leads to a “transformation” of thorium nuclei that is 104 times faster than the normal nuclear decay for this isotope. In a “Comment” [G. Ericsson, S. Pomp, H. Sjostrand, E. Traneus, Phys. Lett. A 373 (2009) 3795] to the thorium work, we have criticized the evidence provided for this claim. In a “Reply” [F. Cardone, R. Mignani, A. Petrucci, Phys. Lett. A 373 (2009) 3797] Cardone et al. answer only some minor points but avoid addressing the real issue. The information provided in their Reply displays a worrying lack of control of their experimental situation and the data they put forward as evidence for their claims. We point out several shortcomings and errors in the described experimental preparations, set-up and reporting, as well as in the data analysis. We conclude that the evidence presented by Cardone et al. is insufficient to justify their claims of accelerated thorium decay (by “piezonuclear reactions” or otherwise).