Vol 29, No 3 (2024)
Research paper
Published online: 2024-06-20

open access

Page views 39
Article views/downloads 3
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Improved dose compensation model owing to short irradiation interruption time for hypoxic tumor using a microdosimetric kinetic model

Daisuke Kawahara1
DOI: 10.5603/rpor.101098
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2024;29(3):271-279.

Abstract

Background: The objective was to enhance the biological compensation factor related to irradiation interruption in a short time (short irradiation interruption) in hypoxic tumors using a refined microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) for photon radiation therapy.

Materials and methods: The biological dose differences were calculated for CHO-K1 cells exposed to a photon beam, considering interruptions of (τ) of 0–120 min and pO2 at oxygen levels of 0.075–160 mm Hg. The interrupted dose fraction (IDF) was defined as the percentage ratio of the dose delivered before short irradiation interruption to the total dose, which ranged from 10–90%. The compensated dose was calculated based on an IDF of 10–90% for a dose of 2–8 Gy and oxygen levels of 0.075–160 mm Hg.

Results: The ∆ with and without short irradiation interruption was more pronounced with a higher dose and increased pO2. It exceeded 3% between IDF of 50% and either 10% or 90% and occurred more than τ = 50 min at 0.075 mm Hg, τ = 20 min at 3 mm Hg, τ = 20 min at 8 mm Hg, τ = 20 min at 15 mm Hg, τ = 20 min at 38 mm Hg, and τ = 20 min at 160 mm Hg. The dose compensation factor was greater at higher IDF rates.

Conclusion: The biological dose decreased with longer interruption times and higher oxygen concentrations. The improved model can compensate for the biological doses at various oxygen concentrations.

Advances in knowledge: The current study improved the dose compensation method for the decrease in the biological effect owing to short irradiation interruption by considering the oxygen concentration.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Staffurth J. Radiotherapy Development Board. A review of the clinical evidence for intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2010; 22(8): 643–657.
  2. Veldeman L, Madani I, Hulstaert F, et al. Evidence behind use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy: a systematic review of comparative clinical studies. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9(4): 367–375.
  3. Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 2008; 35(1): 310–317.
  4. Verbakel WF, van den Berg J, Slotman BJ, et al. Comparable cell survival between high dose rate flattening filter free and conventional dose rate irradiation. Acta Oncol. 2013; 52(3): 652–657.
  5. Lohse I, Lang S, Hrbacek J, et al. Effect of high dose per pulse flattening filter-free beams on cancer cell survival. Radiother Oncol. 2011; 101(1): 226–232.
  6. Nakano H, Kawahara D, Ono K, et al. Effect of dose-delivery time for flattened and flattening filter-free photon beams based on microdosimetric kinetic model. PLoS One. 2018; 13(11): e0206673.
  7. Kawahara D, Nakano H, Saito A, et al. Dose compensation based on biological effectiveness due to interruption time for photon radiation therapy. Br J Radiol. 2020; 93(1111): 20200125.
  8. Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for the radiologist. 7th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2012: 1–576.
  9. Tinganelli W, Ma NY, Von Neubeck C, et al. Influence of chronic hypoxia and radiation quality on cell survival. J Radiat Res. 2013; 54 Suppl 1(Suppl 1): i13–i22.
  10. Inaniwa T, Kanematsu N, Suzuki M, et al. Effects of beam interruption time on tumor control probability in single-fractionated carbon-ion radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Phys Med Biol. 2015; 60(10): 4105–4121.
  11. Hawkins RB. A microdosimetric-kinetic model of cell death from exposure to ionizing radiation of any LET, with experimental and clinical applications. Int J Radiat Biol. 1996; 69(6): 739–755.
  12. Matsuya Y, McMahon SJ, Ghita M, et al. Intensity Modulated Radiation Fields Induce Protective Effects and Reduce Importance of Dose-Rate Effects. Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1): 9483.
  13. Paul-Gilloteaux P, Potiron V, Delpon G, et al. Optimizing radiotherapy protocols using computer automata to model tumour cell death as a function of oxygen diffusion processes. Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1): 2280.
  14. McKeown SR. Defining normoxia, physoxia and hypoxia in tumours-implications for treatment response. Br J Radiol. 2014; 87(1035): 20130676.
  15. Brenner DJ, Hlatky LR, Hahnfeldt PJ, et al. The linear-quadratic model and most other common radiobiological models result in similar predictions of time-dose relationships. Radiat Res. 1998; 150(1): 83–91.
  16. Kawahara D, Nakano H, Ozawa S, et al. Relative biological effectiveness study of Lipiodol based on microdosimetric-kinetic model. Phys Med. 2018; 46: 89–95.
  17. Shibamoto Y, Ito M, Sugie C, et al. Recovery from sublethal damage during intermittent exposures in cultured tumor cells: implications for dose modification in radiosurgery and IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 59(5): 1484–1490.
  18. Hussein M, Clark CH, Nisbet A. Challenges in calculation of the gamma index in radiotherapy - Towards good practice. Phys Med. 2017; 36: 1–11.
  19. Adrian G, Konradsson E, Lempart M, et al. The FLASH effect depends on oxygen concentration. Br J Radiol. 2020; 93(1106): 20190702.