Explore the vast range of titles available.

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.

Purpose To implement and validate a beam current transformer as a passive monitoring device on a pulsed electron beam medical linear accelerator (LINAC) for ultra‐high dose rate (UHDR) irradiations in the operational range of at least 3 Gy to improve dosimetric procedures currently in use for FLASH radiotherapy (FLASH‐RT) studies. Methods Two beam current transformers (BCTs) were placed at the exit of a medical LINAC capable of UHDR irradiations. The BCTs were validated as monitoring devices by verifying beam parameters consistency between nominal values and measured values, determining the relationship between the charge measured and the absorbed dose, and checking the short‐ and long‐term stability of the charge‐absorbed dose ratio. Results The beam parameters measured by the BCTs coincide with the nominal values. The charge‐dose relationship was found to be linear and independent of pulse width and frequency. Short‐ and long‐term stabilities were measured to be within acceptable limits. Conclusions The BCTs were implemented and validated on a pulsed electron beam medical LINAC, thus improving current dosimetric procedures and allowing for a more complete analysis of beam characteristics. BCTs were shown to be a valid method for beam monitoring for UHDR (and therefore FLASH) experiments.

Purpose To investigate the impact of respiratory motion in the treatment margins for lung SBRT frameless treatments and to validate our treatment margins using 4D CBCT data analysis. Methods Two hundred and twenty nine fractions with early stage NSCLC were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were treated in frameless and free breathing conditions. The treatment margins were calculated according to van Herk equation in Mid‐Ventilation. For each fraction, three 4D CBCT scans, pre‐ and postcorrection, and posttreatment, were acquired to assess target baseline shift, target localization accuracy and intra‐fraction motion errors. A bootstrap analysis was performed to assess the minimum number of patients required to define treatment margins. Results The retrospectively calculated target‐baseline shift, target localization accuracy and intra‐fraction motion errors agreed with the literature. The best tailored margins to our cohort of patients were retrospectively computed and resulted in agreement with already published data. The bootstrap analysis showed that fifteen patients were enough to assess treatment margins. Conclusions The treatment margins applied to our patient’s cohort resulted in good agreement with the retrospectively calculated margins based on 4D CBCT data. Moreover, the bootstrap analysis revealed to be a promising method to verify the reliability of the applied treatment margins for safe lung SBRT delivery.

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. 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. 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. 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.

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. 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.