Search

PurposeRecent data have shown that single-fraction irradiation delivered to the whole brain in less than tenths of a second using FLASH radiotherapy (FLASH-RT), does not elicit neurocognitive deficits in mice. This observation has important clinical implications for the management of invasive and treatment-resistant brain tumors that involves relatively large irradiation volumes with high cytotoxic doses.Experimental designTherefore, we aimed at simultaneously investigating the antitumor efficacy and neuroprotective benefits of FLASH-RT 1-month after exposure, using a well-characterized murine orthotopic glioblastoma model. As fractionated regimens of radiotherapy are the standard of care for glioblastoma treatment, we incorporated dose fractionation to simultaneously validate the neuroprotective effects and optimized tumor treatments with FLASH-RT.ResultsThe capability of FLASH-RT to minimize the induction of radiation-induced brain toxicities has been attributed to the reduction of reactive oxygen species, casting some concern that this might translate to a possible loss of antitumor efficacy. Our study shows that FLASH and CONV-RT are isoefficient in delaying glioblastoma growth for all tested regimens. Furthermore, only FLASH-RT was found to significantly spare radiation-induced cognitive deficits in learning and memory in tumor-bearing animals after the delivery of large neurotoxic single dose or hypofractionated regimens.ConclusionsThe present results show that FLASH-RT delivered with hypofractionated regimens is able to spare the normal brain from radiation-induced toxicities without compromising tumor cure. This exciting capability provides an initial framework for future clinical applications of FLASH-RT.See related commentary by Huang and Mendonca, p. 662.

Here, we highlight the potential translational benefits of delivering FLASH radiotherapy using ultra-high dose rates (>100 Gy⋅s-1). Compared with conventional dose-rate (CONV; 0.07-0.1 Gy⋅s-1) modalities, we showed that FLASH did not cause radiation-induced deficits in learning and memory in mice. Moreover, 6 months after exposure, CONV caused permanent alterations in neurocognitive end points, whereas FLASH did not induce behaviors characteristic of anxiety and depression and did not impair extinction memory. Mechanistic investigations showed that increasing the oxygen tension in the brain through carbogen breathing reversed the neuroprotective effects of FLASH, while radiochemical studies confirmed that FLASH produced lower levels of the toxic reactive oxygen species hydrogen peroxide. In addition, FLASH did not induce neuroinflammation, a process described as oxidative stress-dependent, and was also associated with a marked preservation of neuronal morphology and dendritic spine density. The remarkable normal tissue sparing afforded by FLASH may someday provide heretofore unrealized opportunities for dose escalation to the tumor bed, capabilities that promise to hasten the translation of this groundbreaking irradiation modality into clinical practice.

Here, we highlight the potential translational benefits of delivering FLASH radiotherapy using ultra-high dose rates (>100 Gy·s-1). Compared with conventional dose-rate (CONV; 0.07-0.1 Gy·s-1) modalities, we showed that FLASH did not cause radiation-induced deficits in learning and memory in mice. Moreover, 6 months after exposure, CONV caused permanent alterations in neurocognitive end points, whereas FLASH did not induce behaviors characteristic of anxiety and depression and did not impair extinction memory. Mechanistic investigations showed that increasing the oxygen tension in the brain through carbogen breathing reversed the neuroprotective effects of FLASH, while radiochemical studies confirmed that FLASH produced lower levels of the toxic reactive oxygen species hydrogen peroxide. In addition, FLASH did not induce neuroinflammation, a process described as oxidative stress-dependent, and was also associated with a marked preservation of neuronal morphology and dendritic spine density. The remarkable normal tissue sparing afforded by FLASH may someday provide heretofore unrealized opportunities for dose escalation to the tumor bed, capabilities that promise to hasten the translation of this groundbreaking irradiation modality into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Purpose: FLASH or ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) radiation therapy (RT) has gained attention in recent years for its ability to spare normal tissues relative to conventional dose rate (CDR) RT in various preclinical trials. However, clinical implementation of this promising treatment option has been limited because of the lack of availability of accelerators capable of delivering UHDR RT. Commercial options are finally reaching the market that produce electron beams with average dose rates of up to 1000 Gy/s. We established a framework for the acceptance, commissioning, and periodic quality assurance (QA) of electron FLASH units and present an example of commissioning., Methods: A protocol for acceptance, commissioning, and QA of UHDR linear accelerators was established by combining and adapting standards and professional recommendations for standard linear accelerators based on the experience with UHDR at four clinical centers that use different UHDR devices. Non-standard dosimetric beam parameters considered included pulse width, pulse repetition frequency, dose per pulse, and instantaneous dose rate, together with recommendations on how to acquire these measurements., Results: The 6- and 9-MeV beams of an UHDR electron device were commissioned by using this developed protocol. Measurements were acquired with a combination of ion chambers, beam current transformers (BCTs), and dose-rate-independent passive dosimeters. The unit was calibrated according to the concept of redundant dosimetry using a reference setup., Conclusions: This study provides detailed recommendations for the acceptance testing, commissioning, and routine QA of low-energy electron UHDR linear accelerators. The proposed framework is not limited to any specific unit, making it applicable to all existing eFLASH units in the market. Through practical insights and theoretical discourse, this document establishes a benchmark for the commissioning of UHDR devices for clinical use.