% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{DalBello:165889,
author = {R. Dal Bello$^*$ and T. Becher$^*$ and Fuss and M. Krämer
and J. Seco$^*$},
title = {{P}roposal of a chemical mechanism for mini-beam and
micro-beam efficacy},
journal = {Frontiers of physics},
volume = {8},
issn = {1673-3487},
address = {Heidelberg},
publisher = {Springer},
reportid = {DKFZ-2020-02458},
pages = {564836},
year = {2020},
note = {#EA:E041#LA:E041#},
abstract = {This simulation study proposes a chemical mechanism to
define a surrogate to the tumor control during micro- and
mini-beam radiation therapy (MBRT). The main focus is
proton-MBRT (pMBRT) and the methods developed are applied
also to photon-MBRT (MRT). In both cases, the classical
interpretation of physical dose cannot be used to explain
the observed biological effect and a change of paradigm may
be required. MBRT was reported to provide tumor control with
reduced side effects when compared to standard dose
delivery. The underlying mechanisms leading to a
differential response of the normal tissue and the tumor are
still unknown. In this work, we propose a chemical mechanism
to describe the efficacy of MBRT. The model was developed
starting from the observation that pMBRT led to long term
survival without significant side effects of rats implanted
with a high-grade glioma. We distribution of a generic
radiation-induced molecule or radical could be a surrogate
to describe the biological effect. The specific mechanisms
leading to cell damage were outside the scope of this work.
The molecules and radicals were selected according to a set
of properties: (i) they should be stable to allow diffusion
achieving coverage of the dose-valleys, (ii) they should
reach a steady state in production versus removal, (iii)
they should be a product of water radiolysis, and (iv) they
should have oxidizing capacity. A convolution model was
developed to assess the property (i) keeping the analysis as
general as possible. The tumor coverage was defined widening
the interpretation of the ICRU-62 recommendations. The
properties (ii) and (iii) were investigated with the
TRAX-CHEM software. The property (iv) was used to exclude
not relevant chemical species. The results show that
hydrogen peroxide fulfills all the requirements. Moreover,
the modeling of its temporal and spatial distributions
demonstrate that a uniform coverage of the target by this
reactive oxygen specie (ROS) can be achieved during the
beam-on time. The model was compared and proven to be
compatible with three independent photon micro-beam and
proton mini-beam animal experiments. We conclude that
hydrogen peroxide is a good candidate to describe the
mini-beam and micro-beam efficacy. Further experiments are
proposed to experimentally benchmark the model and to
correlate the hydrogen peroxide concentration to the tumor
control probability.},
cin = {E041},
ddc = {530},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)E041-20160331},
pnm = {315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
doi = {10.3389/fphy.2020.564836},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/165889},
}