Time, Dose and Fractionation in Radiotherapy

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Time, Dose and Fractionation in Radiotherapy 2/25/2013 The introduction of Fractionation 2-13/13 Radiobiology lecture Time, Dose and Fractionation in Radiotherapy The Four Rs of Radiobiology Repair of Sublethal Damage • Cells exposed to sparse radiation experience • Efficacy of fractionation based on the 4 Rs: sublethal injury that can be repaired – Repair of sublethal damage • Cell killing requires a greater total dose when given –Repopulation in several fractions – Reassortment of cells within the cell cycle • Most tissue repair occurs in about 3 hours and up –Reoxygenation to 24 hours post radiation • Allows for repair of injured normal tissue and gives a potential therapeutic advantage over tumor cells Reoxygenation Redistribution • Oxygen stabilizes free radicals • Position in cell cycle at time of radiation • Hypoxic cells require more radiation to kill determines sensitivity •Hypoxic tumors • S phase is radioresistant – Temporary vessel constriction •G2 phase delay results in increased radiation – Outgrowth of blood supply and capillary collapse resistance • Tumor shrinkage reduces hypoxic areas • Fractionated RT redistributes cells • Reinforces fractionated dosing • Rapidly cycling cells like mucosa, skin are more sensitive • Slower cyclers like connective tissue, brain are spared 1 2/25/2013 Repopulation • Increased regeneration of surviving fraction Basics of Fractionation • Rapidly proliferating tumors regenerate faster • Determines the length and timing of therapy course • Dividing a dose into several fractions spares normal tissues • Accelerated Repopulation – Repair of sublethal damage between dose fractions – Repopulation of cells • Dividing a dose into several fractions increases damage to the tumor – Reoxygenation of tumor environment – Reassortment of cells into radiosensitive phases of the cell cycle between dose fraction • Prolongation of treatment reduces early reactions • However, excessive prolongation allows surviving tumor cells to proliferate Impact of the 4Rs The Time Scale of the 4 Rs • Inherent radiosensitivity/repair capacity will make a •Repair = fast tumor either sensitive or resistant to therapy, or a • Reoxygenation and normal cell more or less prone to radiation-induced redistribution = moderate damage • Repopulation = slow • Reoxygenation of tumor during radiotherapy will have anet sensitiz ing effec t • Redistribution in the cell cycle is used to advantage in fractionated radiotherapy •Repopulation – Has the net effect of making the tumor seem more resistant – Is a way for normal cells to recover from acute radiation reactions Early vs. Late Responding Tissues Dose Response for Early and Late Responsive • In normal tissue, there is Tissues a clear difference between tissues that are • If fewer and larger dose fractions are early responding and those given, late reactions are more severe that are late responding • Dose-response for late-responding tissues is more curved • Early-responding tissues • For early effects, α/β is large are triggered to – α dominates at low doses proliferate within a few – Linear and quadratic components of cell weeks of the start of killing are not equal until about 10 Gy fractionated radiation • For late effects, α/β is small – β term has an influence at low doses • Prolongation of – Linear and quadratic components are radiotherapy has little equal at about 2 Gy sparing effect on late responding tissues 2 2/25/2013 Early vs. Late Responding Tissues and Radiosensitivity M Early vs. Late Responding Tissues and Radiosensitivity G2 G1 • Fraction size is the dominant factor in • Cells are most resistant in late S phase S determining late effects; overall treatment – Rapidly proliferating cells may have a major portion of cells in S time has little influence. phase – These cells are resitistan tbecause new cellsoffse t those kille d by dose fractions • Slowly growing cells with a long cell cycle may have a second • Fraction size and overall treatment time both resistant phase in early G1 determine the response of acutely responding – A slowly proliferating population may have many cells in early G1 or tissue not proliferating at all (resting cells) – Many late-responding normal tissues are resistant because of the presence of many resting cells – Applies to small doses per fraction and disappears at higher doses per fraction Radiation therapy fractionation schedule Treatment: 60 Gy/3 fractions Conventional Fractionation Hyperfractionation To further reduce late effects, same or slightly increased early effects Achieve the same or better tumor control Accelerated Treatment Continuous Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiation Therapy (CHART) Hypofractionation Review of Cell Survival Curves Following Characteristic radiographic findings Radiation •S= e-α D-βD2 – Where S is the fraction of cells surviving a dose D – α is the number of logs of cell kill per Gy from the linear po rtio n of the curve – β is the number of logs of cell kill per Gy2 from the quadratic portion of baseline the curve • Linear and quadratic 4 mos, CR 8 mos, components of cell kill subtle fibrosis 12 mos, are equal at D=α/β mature fibrosis 18 mos, NED 3 2/25/2013 Fractionated Radiation Survival Curves Biologically Effective Dose (BED) • Shoulder of curve is repeated • Effective dose- survival curve for multi-fractionation d –an exponentia l BED = (nd)( 1+ ) function of dose – i.e. a straight line from the origin through a point on the single dose survival curve Using the linear-Quadrant concept to calculate BED Example Calculation Conventional Treatment Hyperfractionation • If we assume the α/β is 3 Gy for late-responding tissue and 10 • 70 fractions of 1.15 Gy given twice daily, 6 hours apart, 5 days Gy for early-responding tissue, then: per week for an overall treatment time of 7 weeks • 30 fractions of 2 Gy given one fraction per day, 5 days per week for and overall treatment times of 6 weeks: Early effects: = 80.5 1 + 1.15 E = (nd) 1 + d 10 α α/β = 89. 8 Gy10 Early effects = 60 1 + 2 Late effects: = 80.5 1 + 1.15 10 3 = 72 Gy10 = 111.4 Gy3 Late Effects = 60 1 + 2 i.e this treatment regime is more effective than the conventional 60 3 Gy for both early and late effects = 100 Gy3 4 2/25/2013 The need for retreatment Retreatment after Radiotherapy 1, Tumor recurrence 2, Second tumor ◊ bad lifestyle ◊ genetic predisposition ◊ treatment-induced Factors must be taken into account in Recovery of early and late responding retreatment tissues • Dose and volume treated in the past and the • early responding tissues recover well from overlap with initial field initial radiation and will tolerate re- • Chemotherapy in the past irradiation to almost full dose, such as skin • The time interval reaction • Critical structures involved • RT technique to be used in retreatment • animal studies showed the late responding tissues such as spinal cord do recover from • Any alternative prior radiation, probably need longer time SBRA case in an 88 year old non-smoker, Clinical experiences p16 + L Tonsil cancer recurred • 8 Gy/fraction x 5 •Spinal cord • Treatment every •Brain 3rd day • Head and neck • KPS 90%, no •Rectum weight loss, no swallowing issues •Bone • Ipsilateral tx •Breast only •lung 5 2/25/2013 Oral cavity Rapid dose fall‐off constraints SBRA is applicable for many different situations • 86 yo woman with recurrent oral cavity cancer • Treated to 40 Gy at 8 Gy/fraction • Note CT and PET 3 months post SBRA Herron DE, et al, IJROBP, Vol 75, 2009 Vargo JA, et al, Head and Neck, March 2011 Treatment response 6 2/25/2013 Alternative Radiation Modalities • Fast neutrons • Boron neutron capture •Protons •Carbon ion Putative advantages of alternative radiation modalities Fast neurons • Better physical dose distribution • Indirectly ionizing • Advantageous radiobiologic properties • Giving up energy to producing recoil protons, a- –Higher LET particles and havier nuclear fragments – Hig her RBE • Higher RBE, reduced OER, no sublethal damage –Lower OER repair, no variation of sensitivity through cell – Little sublethal damage repair cycle – Less variation of sensitivity through the • Better local control in salivary gland tumor, but cell cycle at the expense of normal tissue damage 7 2/25/2013 Protons Boron neutron capture therapy • RBE and OER of protons are not different from • To deliver a drug-containing boron that localizes that of 250-kv x-rays only in the tumor, then treat with low-energy thermal neutrons that interact with boron to • Unique depth-dose patterns and Bragg peak produce short-range, densely ionizing a-particles • Where is the magic drug? • Poor penetration with thermal neutrons Spread out of the Bragg Peak Choroidal melanoma proton therapy Carbon ion radiotherapy IMRT and proton treatment plan comparison • Similar depth-dose profile and Bragg peak as protons • Higher LET •lower OER • Loss of repair capacity • Smaller varivation in radiosensitivity through cell cycle • Increase in RBE toward the end of particle range • Target volume can be visualized by PET 8 2/25/2013 Increase in RBE toward the end of particle range 9.
Recommended publications
  • Radiobiology Is a Young Science and Is Solely Concerned with the Study Of
    The Rockefeller Foundation and its support of Radiobiology up to the 1970s By Sinclair Wynchank Senior Lecturer University of Cape Town Rondebosch, South Africa [email protected] © 2011 by Sinclair Wynchank Radiation biology, or radiobiology, is a very young science, solely concerned with the study of the interactions between ionizing radiation and living matter. This science slowly became a recognized field of study after the discovery of ionizing radiation (i.e., X rays) in 1895. A broadly varied and evolving terminology has been applied to aspects of radiobiology and therefore, archival searches concerning it are complex. This report is a work in progress, which mainly recounts support given by the Rockefeller Foundation (RF) to radiobiology. The RF was a most important player in the early history of radiobiology and a crucial influence in ensuring that the science steadily matured during its first six decades. Time constraints prevented all relevant items from being accessed, but a clear idea of the RF‟s strong influence on radiobiology‟s early history has resulted. Examples of RF activities to verify this assertion are given below, in by and large chronological order. After a brief analysis of RF aid, there is a short account of why its support so strongly benefitted the young science. To my knowledge there is very little written about the history of radiobiology and nothing about the role that the RF or other philanthropic bodies played in this history. Inevitably, for an extensive time, individual radiobiologists first studied other fields of science before radiobiology. Even in 2011 there are only five universities in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • General Guidelines for the Estimation of Committed Effective Dose from Incorporation Monitoring Data
    Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaftt Wissenschaftliche Berichte FZKA 7243 General Guidelines for the Estimation of Committed Effective Dose from Incorporation Monitoring Data (Project IDEAS – EU Contract No. FIKR-CT2001-00160) H. Doerfel, A. Andrasi, M. Bailey, V. Berkovski, E. Blanchardon, C.-M. Castellani, C. Hurtgen, B. LeGuen, I. Malatova, J. Marsh, J. Stather Hauptabteilung Sicherheit August 2006 Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Wissenschaftliche Berichte FZKA 7243 GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR THE ESTIMATION OF COMMITTED EFFECTIVE DOSE FROM INCORPORATION MONITORING DATA (Project IDEAS – EU Contract No. FIKR-CT2001-00160) H. Doerfel, A. Andrasi 1, M. Bailey 2, V. Berkovski 3, E. Blanchardon 6, C.-M. Castellani 4, C. Hurtgen 5, B. LeGuen 7, I. Malatova 8, J. Marsh 2, J. Stather 2 Hauptabteilung Sicherheit 1 KFKI Atomic Energy Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary 2 Health Protection Agency, Radiation Protection Division, (formerly National Radiological Protection Board), Chilton, Didcot, United Kingdom 3 Radiation Protection Institute, Kiev, Ukraine 4 ENEA Institute for Radiation Protection, Bologna, Italy 5 Belgian Nuclear Research Centre, Mol, Belgium 7 Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France 8 Electricité de France (EDF), Saint-Denis, France 9 National Radiation Protection Institute, Praha, Czech Republic Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, Karlsruhe 2006 Für diesen Bericht behalten wir uns alle Rechte vor Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH Postfach 3640, 76021 Karlsruhe Mitglied der Hermann von Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Deutscher Forschungszentren (HGF) ISSN 0947-8620 urn:nbn:de:0005-072434 IDEAS General Guidelines – June 2006 Abstract Doses from intakes of radionuclides cannot be measured but must be assessed from monitoring, such as whole body counting or urinary excretion measurements.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation and Cell Cycle
    High Yield Summary Reviews in Radiation Oncology Radiation and Cancer Biology Gayle E. Woloschak, PhD Tuesday, June 18, 2019 11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time June 25, 2019 Gayle E. Woloschak PhD Professor of Radiation Oncology, Radiology, and Cell & Molecular Biology Associate Dean for Graduate Student and Postdoctoral Affairs Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine June 25, 2019 Definitions • Bq-2.7x10-11 Ci—equal to one disintegration per sec • Ci—3.7x1010 disintegrations per sec • Gy—absorbed radiation dose, the quantity which deposits 1 Joule of energy per kg—1Gy=100rad • Sievert—dose equivalence—multiply absorbed dose in Gy by the Quality Factor (Q)— 1Sv=100rem • LET—measure of the rate of energy transfer from an ionizing radiation to the target material—keV of energy lost/micron track length Unit Conversion Factors: SI and Conventional Units • 1 Bq = 2.7 × 10–11 Ci = 27 pCi • 1 Ci = 3.7 × 1010 Bq = 37 GBq • 1 Sv = 100 rem • 1 rem = 0.01 Sv • 1 Gy = 100 rad • 1 rad = 0.01 Gy • 1 Sv Bq–1 = 3.7 × 106 rem μCi–1 • 1 rem μCi–1 = 2.7 × 10–7 Sv Bq–1 • 1 Gy Bq–1 = 3,7 × 106 rad μCi–1 • 1 rad μCi–1 = 2,7 × 10–7 Gy Bq–1 Biomolecular Action of Ionizing Radiation; Editor:Shirley Lehnert, 2007 Units Used in Radiation Protection • Equivalent dose—average dose x radiation weighting factor—Sv • Effective dose—sum of equivalent doses to organs and tissues exposed, each multiplied by the appropriate tissue weighting factor—Sv • Committed equivalent dose—equivalent dose integrated over 50 years (relevant to incroporated radionuclides)—Sv
    [Show full text]
  • Proton Radiobiology
    Cancers 2015, 7, 353-381; doi:10.3390/cancers7010353 OPEN ACCESS cancers ISSN 2072-6694 www.mdpi.com/journal/cancers Review Proton Radiobiology Francesco Tommasino 1 and Marco Durante 1,2,* 1 GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, Department of Biophysics, Darmstadt 64291, Germany; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 Technische Universität Darmstadt, Institut für Festkörperphysik, Darmstadt 64291, Germany * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +49-6159-71-2009. Academic Editor: Xiaodong Zhang Received: 3 December 2014 / Accepted: 9 February 2015 / Published: 12 February 2015 Abstract: In addition to the physical advantages (Bragg peak), the use of charged particles in cancer therapy can be associated with distinct biological effects compared to X-rays. While heavy ions (densely ionizing radiation) are known to have an energy- and charge-dependent increased Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE), protons should not be very different from sparsely ionizing photons. A slightly increased biological effectiveness is taken into account in proton treatment planning by assuming a fixed RBE of 1.1 for the whole radiation field. However, data emerging from recent studies suggest that, for several end points of clinical relevance, the biological response is differentially modulated by protons compared to photons. In parallel, research in the field of medical physics highlighted how variations in RBE that are currently neglected might actually result in deposition of significant doses in healthy organs. This seems to be relevant in particular for normal tissues in the entrance region and for organs at risk close behind the tumor. All these aspects will be considered and discussed in this review, highlighting how a re-discussion of the role of a variable RBE in proton therapy might be well-timed.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiobiology
    The Management of Gynecologic Cancers: Radiobiology Brian Marples PhD Beaumont Health Systems Overview of presentation • Assessment of normal tissue response • Radiobiology modeling • Role of HPV in tumor response • Hypoxic and tumor response Radiobiology and normal tissue response and tolerance • The Emami paper (IJROBP 21: 109–122 1991) – 1/3, 2/3, whole organs - some clinical, some laboratory data – Consensus of clinical experience and opinions – Concerns with delivered dose and measurements of dose – Out of date: Move from 2D to 3D treatment planning, higher energy beams, better penetration, improved ability to measure dose, increased use combined therapy • Quantitative – QUANTEC, CTCAE v4.0, LENT-SOMA, IIEF – Quantitative Analysis of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic – Updated guidelines published in Red Journal • IJROBP vol 76, No., 3 2010 (suppl.) – 16 organ-specific papers – Radiation dose-volume effects of the urinary bladder • Viswanathan et al. IJROBP 76: 3: S116–S122, 2010 • Cervix BRT: size of 60-Gy volume and dose rate have impact on late rectal complication BED = Biologically Effective Dose • BED commonly used for isoeffective dose calculations • BED is a measure of the true biological dose delivered by a particular combination of dose per fraction and total dose to a particular tissue characterized by a specific α/β ratio • BED is not Biologically Equivalent Dose • Biologically equivalent doses are calculated in 2-Gy equivalents using the EQD2 equation • Cumulative: brachytherapy dose added to the dose from external beam therapy Bentzen et al., Radiother Oncol 105: 266–268, 2012 Dale, Br J Radiol 58: 515–528, 1985 Biologically Effective Dose (BED) • BED compare effects fractionation schedules – need to know α/β ratio of the tissues concerned BED = total dose .
    [Show full text]
  • Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes Due to Solar Particle Events
    Evidence Report: Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes due to Solar Particle Events Human Research Program Space Radiation Program Element Approved for Public Release: April 6, 2016 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas CURRENT CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS: Lisa Carnell, PhD NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA Steve Blattnig, PhD NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA Shaowen Hu, PhD Wyle Science Technology & Engineering, Houston, TX Janice Huff, PhD Universities Space Research Association, Houston, TX Myung-Hee Kim, PhD Wyle Science Technology & Engineering, Houston, TX Ryan Norman, PhD NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA Zarana Patel, PhD Wyle Science Technology & Engineering, Houston, TX Lisa Simonsen, PhD NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA Honglu Wu, PhD NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX PREVIOUS CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS: Honglu Wu NASA Johnson Space Center Janice L. Huff Universities Space Research Association Rachel Casey Universities Space Research Association Myung-Hee Kim Universities Space Research Association Francis A. Cucinotta NASA Johnson Space Center Reference for original report: Human Health and Performance Risks of Space Exploration Missions, (Jancy C. McPhee and John B. Charles, editors), NASA SP-2009- 3405, 2009. 1 Table of Contents I. PRD RISK TITLE: RISK OF ACUTE RADIATION SYNDROMES DUE TO SOLAR PARTICLE EVENTS ........................................................................................... 4 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Radiobiology of Tissue Reactions
    Radiobiology of tissue reactions W. Do¨ rr Department of Radiation Oncology and Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiooncology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University Vienna/ Vienna General Hospital, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract–Tissue effects of radiation exposure are observed in virtually all normal tissues, with interactions when several organs are involved. Early reactions occur in turnover tissues, where proliferative impairment results in hypoplasia; late reactions, based on combined parenchy- mal, vascular, and connective tissue changes, result in loss of function within the exposed volume; consequential late effects develop through interactions between early and late effects in the same organ; and very late effects are dominated by vascular sequelae. Invariably, involvement of the immune system is observed. Importantly, latent times of late effects are inversely dependent on the biologically equieffective dose. Each tissue component and – importantly – each individual symptom/endpoint displays a specific dose–effect relationship. Equieffective doses are modulated by exposure conditions: in particular, dose-rate reduction – down to chronic levels – and dose fractionation impact on late responding tissues, while overall exposure time predominantly affects early (and consequential late) reactions. Consequences of partial organ exposure are related to tissue architecture. In ‘tubular’ organs (gastrointestinal tract, but also vasculature), punctual exposure affects function in downstream compartments. In ‘parallel’ organs, such as liver or lungs, only exposure of a significant (organ-dependent) fraction of the total volume results in clinical consequences. Forthcoming studies must address biomarkers of the individual risk for tissue reactions, and strategies to prevent/mitigate tissue effects after exposure.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Program
    PRELIMINARY PROGRAM 55th Annual Meeting of the Health Physics Society 22nd Biennial Campus Radiation Safety Officers Meeting (American Conference of Radiological Safety) 27 June - 1 July 2010 Salt Palace Convention Center Salt Lake City, Utah Key Dates Current Events/Works-In-Progress Deadline . .28 May Social/Technical Preregistration Deadline . .31 May HPS Annual Meeting Preregistration Deadline . 31 May PEP Preregistration Deadline . .31 May Hotel Registration Deadline . 5 June AAHP Courses . 26 June Professional Enrichment Program . 27 June - 1 July HPS 55th Annual Meeting . 27 June - 1 July American Board of Health Physics Written Exam . 28 June Registration Hours and Location Registration at the Salt Palace Convention Center - Foyer of Exhibit Hall A Saturday, 26 June . 2:00 - 5:00 pm Sunday, 27 June . 10:00 am - 5:00 pm Monday, 28 June . 8:00 am - 4:00 pm Tuesday, 29 June . 8:00 am - 4:00 pm Wednesday, 30 June . 8:00 am - 4:00 pm Thursday, 1 July . 8:00 - 11:00 am Saturday Saturday AAHP Courses will take place in the Hilton Hotel Sunday - Thursday All PEPs, CELs and Sessions will be at the Salt Palace Convention Center HPS Secretariat 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd. Suite 402 McLean, VA22101 (703) 790-1745; FAX: (703) 790-2672 Email: [email protected]; Website: www.hps.org 1 Table of Contents Important Events . 6 General Information . 7 Hotel Reservation Information . 7 Tours and Events Listing . 9 Scientific Program . 12 Placement Information . 32 AAHP Courses . 33 Professional Enrichment Program . 34 Continuing Education Lecture Abstracts . 46 Annual Meeting Registration Form . 48-49 CURRENT EVENTS/WORKS-IN-PROGRESS The submission form for the Current Events/Works-in-Progress poster session is on the Health Physics Society Website at www .hps .org under the Salt Lake City Annual Meeting section .
    [Show full text]
  • Radiobiology of Radionuclide Therapy Prof Sarah Baatout [email protected]
    Radiobiology of radionuclide therapy Prof Sarah Baatout [email protected] Head of the Radiobiology Unit, SCK•CEN Faculty of Biosciences Engineering, Universiteit Gent, Belgium Faculté des Sciences, Université de Namur, Belgium International Course on THERANOSTICS AND RADIOTHERAPY, A Joint Initiative of IAEA-BELNUC-Institut Bordet 2-6/10/2017 © SCK•CEN Academy Cancer definition . Many definitions . Definition (used by ASC) : . Cancer is a large group of diseases characterized by the uncontrolled growth and spread of abnormal cells. If the spread is not controlled, it can result in death. Treatment requires a multidisciplinary approach © SCK•CEN Academy What is/causes cancer? . It is thought that several mutations need to occur to give rise to cancer. Mutations of normal genes : . oncogenes linked to accelerated cell proliferation . tumour suppressor genes linked to decreased cell death. over 100s forms of cancer © SCK•CEN Academy What causes cancer? . Cells that are old or not functioning properly normally self destruct and are replaced by new cells. However, cancerous cells do not self destruct and continue to divide rapidly producing millions of new cancerous cells. At least 5 mutations Normal Cell Cancer Cell Obeys strict rules Disobeys rules Divides only when told to Divides at will Dies rather than misbehaving Bad behavior doesn’t kill Stays close to home Wanders through body Careful with chromosomes Careless with chromosomes © SCK•CEN Academy Cancer cure = minimum killing of 99,9% cells 5 © SCK•CEN Academy Situation in Belgium In 2013, 65,847 new cancer diagnoses in Belgium 34,542 in men (53%) 30,945 in women (47%) Before 75th anniversary 59% 69% are still alive 5 years after diagnosis 3% of the Belgian population is living with cancer or has been diagnosed with cancer in the last 10 years 13% of patients with cancer have multiple tumours Estimation for 2025 12,000 more new diagnoses than in 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PHYSICAL and BIOLOGICAL BASIS of RADIATION ONCOLOGY Ever Since the Discovery of X-Ray by Rontgen, a German Physicist in 1985
    THE PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL BASIS OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY Ever since the discovery of x‐ray by Rontgen, a German physicist in 1985, x‐ray has been used in various types of medical procedures. The very first medical use of x‐rays was reported in January of 1896 which indicated that the x‐rays were used to locate a piece of a knife in the backbone of a drunken sailor who was paralyzed until the fragment was removed following its localization. At that time this new technology very rapidly spread through Europe and the United States and the field of diagnostic radiology was born. Not too long after that the radiation was used to treat shallow tumors of the skin by doctors. RADIOBIOLOGY Radiobiology is the study of the action of ionizing radiation on living things. This certainly involves a fair amount of radiation physics and a good understanding of various types of ionizing radiation as well as a description of the physics and chemistry of the processes by which radiation is absorbed. X‐ray was discovered in December 1895 by a German Physicist “Wilhelm Conrad Rontgen”. First medical use of X‐ray is reported as early as January 1896. After this time, the field of Radiology was born. Reports indicate the first therapeutic use of X‐ray was in 1897 to treat skin melanoma. Radioactivity was discovered by “Antonio Henri Becquerel” in 1898. Radium was isolated by “Pierre & Marie Curie” also in 1898. Rad_Bio; Physics and Chemistry of X‐ray absorption pg. 1 of 20 First recorded radiobiology experiment was performed by Becquerel, when he inadvertently left a Radium container in his pocket, resulting in skin erythema that came about 2 weeks later.
    [Show full text]
  • The Radiobiological Four "R"S of Hypofractionation
    The Radiobiological Four "R"s of Hypofractionation Brian Marples PhD Beaumont Health Systems Overview of the presentation • Definition of hypofractionation • Radiobiology – 4 R’s – Standard fraction dosing • Linear quadratic (LQ) model – is it valid? – Radiosensitivity – 5th R of radiobiology • 4 R’s radiobiology of SBRT/SRS – Cell cycle, vascular effects, hypoxia, DNA repair • Conclusions Hypofractionation, SRS, SBRT [SABR] • Conventional fractionation (1.8-2 Gy) • Hypofractionation – doses of 2.5 Gy and above • Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) – entire dose is given in a single fraction – extreme example of SBRT– ablative doses of RT • Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) – a.k.a. stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) – defined as treatment of tumors with 1 to 5/8 dose fractions – SBRT paradigm shift from the practice of radiation therapy – uncontested that conventional RT better for normal tissues 4 R’s of radiobiology • Repopulation, Redistribution, Repair & Reoxygenation • Enabled development of safe and effective dose- fractionation regimens – along with a rudimentary appreciation of why treatment may succeed or fail (CHART v EORTC22851) • Understanding the 4R’s allows the concomitant use of drugs: – Repopulation, redistribution, repair and re-oxygenation – EGFR blockade by cetuximab in Head and Neck • Bonner et al. N Engl J Med 2006;354(6): – Use of DNA repair inhibitor – Inhibitors of neo-vascularization in glioma 4(5) R’s of conventional fractionated RT “factors work in opposite directions” • Redistribution (Reassortment): Sensitize tumors – cell-cycle progression into RT-sensitive phases • Repopulation and Repair – tumors: decreases radiation sensitivity – early-reacting normal tissues: increase in radiation tolerance with increasing overall treatment time • Reoxygenation: Sensitize tumors – oxygenation of surviving hypoxic cells • Radiosensitivity (5th R) – intrinsic sensitivity of tumor: modeled by LQ Steel, McMillan, Peacock.
    [Show full text]
  • Bq = Becquerel Gy = Gray (Sv = Sievert)
    Louis Harold Gray He is honored by call- ing the physical dose Bq = becquerel unit "gray*" – abbrevi- Gy = gray ated Gy (Sv = sievert) Photo from 1957 Chapter 5 Activity and Dose The activity of a radioactive source When an atom disintegrates, radiation is emitted. If the rate of disintegrations is large, the radioactive source is considered to have a high activity. The unit for the activity of a radioactive source was named after Becquerel (abbreviated Bq) and is defined as: 1 Bq = 1 disintegration per sec. In a number of countries, the old unit, the curie (abbreviated Ci and named after Marie and Pierre Curie) is still used. The curie-unit was defined as the activity in one gram of radium. The number of disintegrations per second in one gram of radium is 37 billion. The relation between the curie and the becquerel is given by: 1 Ci = 3.7 • 1010 Bq The accepted practice is to give the activity of a radioactive source in becquerel. This is because Bq is the unit chosen for the system of international units (SI-units). But one problem is that the numbers in becquerel are always very large. Consequently the activity is given in kilo (103), mega (106), giga (109)and tera (1012) becquerel. If a source is given in curies the number is small. For example; when talking about radioactivity in food products, 3,700 Bq per kilogram of meat is a large number and consequently considered to be dangerous. If however, the same activity is given in Ci, it is only 0.0000001 curie per kilogram – "nothing to worry about?".
    [Show full text]