employee
employee
employee
employee
employee
employee
Russian Federation
GRNTI 76.03 Медико-биологические дисциплины
GRNTI 76.33 Гигиена и эпидемиология
OKSO 14.04.02 Ядерные физика и технологии
OKSO 31.06.2001 Клиническая медицина
OKSO 31.08.08 Радиология
OKSO 32.08.12 Эпидемиология
BBK 51 Социальная гигиена и организация здравоохранения. Гигиена. Эпидемиология
BBK 534 Общая диагностика
TBK 5708 Гигиена и санитария. Эпидемиология. Медицинская экология
TBK 5712 Медицинская биология. Гистология
TBK 5734 Медицинская радиология и рентгенология
TBK 6212 Радиоактивные элементы и изотопы. Радиохимия
Purpose: The radiotherapy methods using heavy charged particles become popular nowadays due to its high efficiency in treatment of oncological patients. On the other side, the practical application of such particles is deeply connected to the influence of secondary radiation, which is a result of nuclear collisions, that can affect the patients’ tissues and organs outside the treatment field. Doses in the out-of-field volumes should be considered from the standpoint of radiological protection. In this study we perform mathematical simulations of the absorbed dose in various organs under the prostate irradiation with carbon ion beam and compared these dose values with existing reference values from CT procedures, and known radiological protection recommendations against current practice of clinical use of carbon ions. Material and methods: The simulation tool is general application Monte-Carlo code FLUKA widely used for ionizing radiation transport modeling and simulations in radiological protection field. The patient model is one of the most detailed voxelized anthropomorphic phantom Vishum. During the simulation the absorbed dose of segmented organs has been assessed under the spread-out Bragg peak of carbon ions uniformly covering the prostate with the physical dose. The resulted dose in organs is normalized to the prostate dose. This is the qualitative assessment of radiation treatment procedure which allowed us to analyze the out-of-field doses in distant organs from the viewpoint of radiological protection in ion beam therapy, following existing ICRP Publication 127 guidelines. Results: The results show that the levels of dose due to prostate irradiation in the regimes widely used in the world practice are two level of magnitude lower than dose levels under the full body CT examination, and are comparable to the aircraft crew doses. Conclusion: Thus, the obtained results might be interested from the risks assessment point of view, including the secondary radiation-induced cancers or other observable or expected treatment effects.
Monte-Carlo simulation, ion beam therapy, dose distribution, anthropomorphic phantom, voxel phantom, prostate, secondary radiation, spread-out Bragg peak
1. Kaprin AD, Ulyanenko SE. Hadron therapy - development points. Medicine: Target Projects. 2016;23:56-59. (in Russ.).
2. Soloviev AN, Gulidov IA, Mardynsky YuS, Ulyanenko SE, Galkin VN, Kaprin AD. Modern Trends in the World of Particles. Summary results of the PTCOG56 Conference. Radiation Biology. Radioecology. 2017;57(5):548-50. (in Russ.).
3. Durante M, Paganetti H. Nuclear physics in particle therapy: a review. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2016;79:096702 DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/79/9/096702.
4. Grassberger C, Paganetti H. Elevated LET components in clinical proton beams. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:6677-91. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/56/20/011.
5. Ulyanenko SE, Lychagin AA, Koryakin SN, Chernukha AE, Troshina MV, Goulidov IN, et al. Simulation of dose and LET distributions within biological objects in proton fields. Medical Physics. 2018;1(77):68-74. (in Russ.).
6. Soloviev AN, Gulidov IA, Mardynsky YuS, Ulyanenko SE, Galkin VN, Kaprin AD. Modern Trends in the World of Particles. Summary results of the PTCOG56 Conference. Radiation Biology. Radioecology. 2017;57(5):548-50. (in Russ.).
7. Durante M, Paganetti H. Nuclear physics in particle therapy: a review. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2016;79:096702 DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/79/9/096702.
8. Grassberger C, Paganetti H. Elevated LET components in clinical proton beams. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:6677-91. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/56/20/011.
9. Ulyanenko SE, Lychagin AA, Koryakin SN, Chernukha AE, Troshina MV, Goulidov IN, et al. Simulation of dose and LET distributions within biological objects in proton fields. Medical Physics. 2018;1(77):68-74. (in Russ.).
10. Polf JC, Newhauser WD, Titt U. Patient neutron dose equivalent exposures outside of the proton therapy treatment field. Radiat Protect Dosimetry. 2005;115:154-8.
11. Zacharatou J, Lee C, Bolch C, Xu W, Paganetti H. Assessment of organ specific neutron doses in proton therapy using whole-body age-dependent voxel phantoms. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:693-714. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/3/012.
12. Koryakina EV, Potetnya VI. Cytogenetic effects of low neutron doses in mammalian cells. Almanac of Clinical Medicine. 2015;41:72-8. (in Russ.).
13. Gunzert-Marx K, Iwase H, Schardt D, Simon RS. Secondary beam fragments produced by 200 MeV 12C ions in water and their dose contributions in carbon ion radiotherapy. New J Phys. 2008;10:075003. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/10/7/075003.
14. Iwase H, Gunzert-Marx K, Haettner E, Schardt D, Gutermuth F, Kraemer M et al. Experimental and theoretical study of the neutron dose produced by carbon ion therapy beams. Radiat Protect Dosimetry. 2007;126(1-4):615-8.
15. Hultqvist M, Gudowska I. Secondary doses delivered to an anthropomorphic male phantom under prostate irradiation with proton and carbon ion beams Radiat Measurements. 2010;45:1410-3. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2010.05.020.
16. Hultqvist M, Gudowska I. Secondary absorbed doses from light ion irradiation in anthropomorphic phantoms representing an adult male and a 10 year old child. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:6633-53. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/55/22/004.
17. Xu XG, Bednarz B, Paganetti H. A review of dosimetry studies on external beam radiation treatment with respect to second cancer induction. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(13):193-241. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/13/R01.
18. ICRP. Radiological Protection in Ion Beam Radiotherapy. ICRP Publication 127. Annals of the ICRP. 2014;43(4)
19. Zankl M, Fill U, Petoussi-Henss N, Regulla D. Organ dose conversion coefficients for external photon irradiation of male and female voxel models. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47:2367-85.
20. Ballarini F, Battistoni G, Campanella M, Carboni M, Cerutti F, Empl A et al. The FLUKA code: an overview. J Phys: Conference Series. 2006;41:151-60.
21. Schlattl H, Zankl M, Becker J, Hoeschen C. Dose conversion coefficients for CT examinations of adults with automatic tube current modulation. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(20):6243-61. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/55/20/013.
22. ICRU. Reference Data for the Validation of Doses from Cosmic-Radiation Exposure of Aircraft Crew. ICRU Report 84 (prepared jointly with ICRP). ICRU. 2010;10(2).
23. Osama M, Sishc BJ, Saha J, Pompos A, Rahimi A, Story M et al. Carbon Ion Radiotherapy: A Review of Clinical Experiences and Preclinical Research, with an Emphasis on DNA Damage/Repair. Cancers. 2017;9(66) DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers9060066.
24. Antipov YM, Britvich GI, Ivanov SV, Kostin MY, Lebedev OP, Lyudmirskii EA, et al. Transversally-flat dose field formation and primary radiobiological exercises with the carbon beam extracted from the U-70 synchrotron. Instruments and Experimental Techniques. 2015;58(4):552-61. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1134/S0020441215040016. (in Russ.).
25. Beketov EE, Isaeva EV, Troshina MV, Lychagin AA, Solovev AN, Koryakin SN et al. Results of the Preliminary Study on the Evaluation of the Biological Effectiveness of Carbon Ion Beam from U-70 Accelerator. Radiation Biology. Radioecology. 2017;57(5):462-70. DOI:https://doi.org/10.7868/S0869803117050022. (in Russ.).
26. Kaprin AD, Galkin VN, Zhavoronkov LP, Ivanov VK, Ivanov SA, Romanko YuS. Synthesis of basic and applied research is the basis of obtaining high-quality findings and translating them into clinical practice. Radiation and Risk. 2017;26(2):26-40. DOI:https://doi.org/10.21870/0131-3878-2017-26-2-26-40. (in Russ.).
