用小鼠模型剂量-反应曲线探讨质子微束放疗的治疗窗口期。

IF 5.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Fardous Reaz , Line Kristensen , Erik Traneus , Brita Singers Sørensen , Niels Bassler
{"title":"用小鼠模型剂量-反应曲线探讨质子微束放疗的治疗窗口期。","authors":"Fardous Reaz ,&nbsp;Line Kristensen ,&nbsp;Erik Traneus ,&nbsp;Brita Singers Sørensen ,&nbsp;Niels Bassler","doi":"10.1016/j.radonc.2025.111050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Proton minibeam radiotherapy (pMBRT) has been observed in preclinical studies to spare normal tissues through its spatially fractionated dose profile. Translating pMBRT to clinical application requires quantification of its therapeutic gain, compared to conventional proton therapy. We compare pMBRT to conventional proton therapy <em>in vivo</em>, focusing on reducing damage to non-target tissues while ensuring the same uniform target dose to achieve equal tumor control.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>We used a multislit collimator in an established mouse irradiation setup to deliver a uniform dose to the target while maintaining a high dose contrast in the entrance region. The right hind legs of 75 female C3H/HeNRj mice were irradiated with the highest dose contrast. Acute skin toxicity was recorded up to 25 days post-irradiation, using a seven-level scoring scheme (0.5 to 3.5) to quantify skin reaction following a well-established protocol. For tumor control comparison, we used CDF1 female mice with a C3H mouse mammary carcinoma subcutaneously implanted in the foot. Dose-response curves of the level of acute skin toxicity and tumor control were generated as a function of the planning target volume (PTV) dose for both conventional and pMBRT setups, allowing for direct comparison.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>pMBRT demonstrated significantly improved normal tissue sparing ability compared to conventional irradiation for same doses in the target. No incidence of higher levels (Score 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5) of toxicity was observed in the pMBRT group, in contrast to the higher toxicity often seen in mice treated with conventional modality at the same PTV dose. At the maximum deliverable dose, the incidence of skin toxicity was still too low to complete the dose–response curves for pMBRT. The estimated grid factor of &lt; 0.65 (Score 1.5) and &lt; 0.7 (Score 2) suggests a substantial enhanced tissue sparing potential with pMBRT. Both modalities show similar tumor control, with TCD50 of 46.9 Gy for conventional therapy and 45 Gy for pMBRT.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We present a comparison method to quantify the efficacy of pMBRT. The observed reduction in acute normal tissue toxicity for pMBRT, compared to conventional proton therapy for at the same PTV dose and maintaining similar tumor control, suggests that pMBRT may offer a substantial therapeutic gain.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21041,"journal":{"name":"Radiotherapy and Oncology","volume":"211 ","pages":"Article 111050"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Probing the therapeutic window of proton minibeam radiotherapy using dose-response curves in a mouse model\",\"authors\":\"Fardous Reaz ,&nbsp;Line Kristensen ,&nbsp;Erik Traneus ,&nbsp;Brita Singers Sørensen ,&nbsp;Niels Bassler\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radonc.2025.111050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Proton minibeam radiotherapy (pMBRT) has been observed in preclinical studies to spare normal tissues through its spatially fractionated dose profile. Translating pMBRT to clinical application requires quantification of its therapeutic gain, compared to conventional proton therapy. We compare pMBRT to conventional proton therapy <em>in vivo</em>, focusing on reducing damage to non-target tissues while ensuring the same uniform target dose to achieve equal tumor control.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>We used a multislit collimator in an established mouse irradiation setup to deliver a uniform dose to the target while maintaining a high dose contrast in the entrance region. The right hind legs of 75 female C3H/HeNRj mice were irradiated with the highest dose contrast. Acute skin toxicity was recorded up to 25 days post-irradiation, using a seven-level scoring scheme (0.5 to 3.5) to quantify skin reaction following a well-established protocol. For tumor control comparison, we used CDF1 female mice with a C3H mouse mammary carcinoma subcutaneously implanted in the foot. Dose-response curves of the level of acute skin toxicity and tumor control were generated as a function of the planning target volume (PTV) dose for both conventional and pMBRT setups, allowing for direct comparison.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>pMBRT demonstrated significantly improved normal tissue sparing ability compared to conventional irradiation for same doses in the target. No incidence of higher levels (Score 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5) of toxicity was observed in the pMBRT group, in contrast to the higher toxicity often seen in mice treated with conventional modality at the same PTV dose. At the maximum deliverable dose, the incidence of skin toxicity was still too low to complete the dose–response curves for pMBRT. The estimated grid factor of &lt; 0.65 (Score 1.5) and &lt; 0.7 (Score 2) suggests a substantial enhanced tissue sparing potential with pMBRT. Both modalities show similar tumor control, with TCD50 of 46.9 Gy for conventional therapy and 45 Gy for pMBRT.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We present a comparison method to quantify the efficacy of pMBRT. The observed reduction in acute normal tissue toxicity for pMBRT, compared to conventional proton therapy for at the same PTV dose and maintaining similar tumor control, suggests that pMBRT may offer a substantial therapeutic gain.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiotherapy and Oncology\",\"volume\":\"211 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111050\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiotherapy and Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814025045542\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiotherapy and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814025045542","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:质子微束放疗(pMBRT)已在临床前研究中观察到通过其空间分割剂量谱来保护正常组织。与传统质子治疗相比,将pMBRT转化为临床应用需要量化其治疗效果。我们将pMBRT与常规质子治疗在体内进行比较,重点是减少对非靶组织的损伤,同时确保相同的均匀靶剂量,以实现相同的肿瘤控制。方法和材料:我们在已建立的小鼠辐照装置中使用多缝准直器向目标提供均匀剂量,同时在入口区域保持高剂量对比。对75只雌性C3H/HeNRj小鼠右后肢进行最高剂量对比照射。在辐照后25 天内记录急性皮肤毒性,使用7级评分方案(0.5至3.5)根据完善的方案量化皮肤反应。为了对照肿瘤,我们将CDF1雌性小鼠与C3H小鼠乳腺癌皮下植入足部。急性皮肤毒性水平和肿瘤控制水平的剂量反应曲线作为常规和pMBRT设置的计划目标体积(PTV)剂量的函数,允许直接比较。结果:与相同剂量的靶区常规照射相比,pMBRT显示出显著改善正常组织保留能力。在pMBRT组中没有观察到更高水平(评分为2.5、3.0和3.5)的毒性,而在相同PTV剂量的常规方式下,小鼠通常会出现更高的毒性。在最大可给药剂量下,皮肤毒性的发生率仍然太低,无法完成pMBRT的剂量-反应曲线。结论:我们提出了一种量化pMBRT疗效的比较方法。与相同PTV剂量的常规质子治疗相比,pMBRT的急性正常组织毒性降低,并保持类似的肿瘤控制,这表明pMBRT可能提供实质性的治疗收益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Probing the therapeutic window of proton minibeam radiotherapy using dose-response curves in a mouse model

Purpose

Proton minibeam radiotherapy (pMBRT) has been observed in preclinical studies to spare normal tissues through its spatially fractionated dose profile. Translating pMBRT to clinical application requires quantification of its therapeutic gain, compared to conventional proton therapy. We compare pMBRT to conventional proton therapy in vivo, focusing on reducing damage to non-target tissues while ensuring the same uniform target dose to achieve equal tumor control.

Methods and Materials

We used a multislit collimator in an established mouse irradiation setup to deliver a uniform dose to the target while maintaining a high dose contrast in the entrance region. The right hind legs of 75 female C3H/HeNRj mice were irradiated with the highest dose contrast. Acute skin toxicity was recorded up to 25 days post-irradiation, using a seven-level scoring scheme (0.5 to 3.5) to quantify skin reaction following a well-established protocol. For tumor control comparison, we used CDF1 female mice with a C3H mouse mammary carcinoma subcutaneously implanted in the foot. Dose-response curves of the level of acute skin toxicity and tumor control were generated as a function of the planning target volume (PTV) dose for both conventional and pMBRT setups, allowing for direct comparison.

Results

pMBRT demonstrated significantly improved normal tissue sparing ability compared to conventional irradiation for same doses in the target. No incidence of higher levels (Score 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5) of toxicity was observed in the pMBRT group, in contrast to the higher toxicity often seen in mice treated with conventional modality at the same PTV dose. At the maximum deliverable dose, the incidence of skin toxicity was still too low to complete the dose–response curves for pMBRT. The estimated grid factor of < 0.65 (Score 1.5) and < 0.7 (Score 2) suggests a substantial enhanced tissue sparing potential with pMBRT. Both modalities show similar tumor control, with TCD50 of 46.9 Gy for conventional therapy and 45 Gy for pMBRT.

Conclusion

We present a comparison method to quantify the efficacy of pMBRT. The observed reduction in acute normal tissue toxicity for pMBRT, compared to conventional proton therapy for at the same PTV dose and maintaining similar tumor control, suggests that pMBRT may offer a substantial therapeutic gain.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Radiotherapy and Oncology
Radiotherapy and Oncology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
2445
审稿时长
45 days
期刊介绍: Radiotherapy and Oncology publishes papers describing original research as well as review articles. It covers areas of interest relating to radiation oncology. This includes: clinical radiotherapy, combined modality treatment, translational studies, epidemiological outcomes, imaging, dosimetry, and radiation therapy planning, experimental work in radiobiology, chemobiology, hyperthermia and tumour biology, as well as data science in radiation oncology and physics aspects relevant to oncology.Papers on more general aspects of interest to the radiation oncologist including chemotherapy, surgery and immunology are also published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信