Page 16 - 2014 Printable Abstract Book
P. 16
TR3. RADIOBIOLOGY OF PROTON AND HEAVY ION THERAPY
(TR301) Radiobiology of Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy. Eleanor A. Blakely, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
Charged particle radiobiology continues to contribute to the rationale for cancer therapy with ion
beams. This topical review will highlight an overview of some of the recent literature identifying
mechanisms by which ion beam therapies can impact tumor targeting, and how particle beam exposures
can impact several of the suspected mechanisms of tumor radioresistance. One of the most important
questions for particle radiobiologists looking to translate their work to the clinic is to determine how
theoretical modeling of their studies can be used in particle treatment planning. With the advent of
personalized medicine contributing quantitative information on particle responses of individual tumors
and normal tissues, it is conceivable that future particle treatment planning can include pulse-to-pulse
changes in particle atomic number and energy, as well as dose and dose-rate to tailor the scanned beam
delivery for maximum effectiveness to the tumor, while sparing the surrounding normal tissue. This
topical review is intended to provide a background in the field of hadron radiobiology, just prior to a
Symposium on Proton and Heavy Ion Beam Therapy that follows. Four experts will review current
treatment-planning strategies and summarize clinical progress in proton and carbon-ion therapy.
Supported by NASA Grant #NNJ11HA941 and by the NASA Space Radiation Lung Cancer Consortium.
TR4. BIODOSIMETRY: WHY DO WE NEED IT AND WHY DO WE NEED IT FAST?
(TR401) Biodosimetry: Why do we need it and why do we need it fast? David J. Brenner, Columbia
University, Center for Radiological Research, New York, NY
President Obama recently remarked that while Russia’s actions are a problem, the government is
“much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in
Manhattan”. After a high-dose large-scale radiological event such as an improvised nuclear device, unless
biodosimetry can provide reasonable estimates of individual radiation doses, potential radiation mitigator
treatments may be ineffective or may even be harmful. For example, in the aftermath of the Chernobyl
accident, 13 individuals were given bone marrow transplants, of which three deaths have been identified
as direct and unnecessary sequelae of the treatment alone - since it was subsequently determined that
the individuals had received radiation doses for which transplants were not indicated.
At lower doses, where the issues relate more to accidents like Fukushima, as well as most potential “dirty
bombs” (RDDs), the need for very high throughput biodosimetry is well illustrated by the 1987 radiation
incident in Goiânia, Brazil - a city with about the same population as Manhattan. In the first few days after
the incident became known 130,000 people (~10% of the population) came for screening, of whom 20
required treatment. In any such large-scale scenario, mass radiological triage will be critical because of
the need to rapidly identify those individuals who will benefit from medical intervention, and those who
will not. Eliminating and reassuring those individuals who do not need medical intervention will be equally
crucial goals in what will be a highly resource-limited and panic-laden scenario. What emerges is the need
for very high throughput biodosimetry - analysis of tens or hundreds of thousands of samples / day. Using
standard biodosimetry methodologies, the highest throughput that can be achieved by a single lab is <500
14 | P a g e
(TR301) Radiobiology of Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy. Eleanor A. Blakely, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
Charged particle radiobiology continues to contribute to the rationale for cancer therapy with ion
beams. This topical review will highlight an overview of some of the recent literature identifying
mechanisms by which ion beam therapies can impact tumor targeting, and how particle beam exposures
can impact several of the suspected mechanisms of tumor radioresistance. One of the most important
questions for particle radiobiologists looking to translate their work to the clinic is to determine how
theoretical modeling of their studies can be used in particle treatment planning. With the advent of
personalized medicine contributing quantitative information on particle responses of individual tumors
and normal tissues, it is conceivable that future particle treatment planning can include pulse-to-pulse
changes in particle atomic number and energy, as well as dose and dose-rate to tailor the scanned beam
delivery for maximum effectiveness to the tumor, while sparing the surrounding normal tissue. This
topical review is intended to provide a background in the field of hadron radiobiology, just prior to a
Symposium on Proton and Heavy Ion Beam Therapy that follows. Four experts will review current
treatment-planning strategies and summarize clinical progress in proton and carbon-ion therapy.
Supported by NASA Grant #NNJ11HA941 and by the NASA Space Radiation Lung Cancer Consortium.
TR4. BIODOSIMETRY: WHY DO WE NEED IT AND WHY DO WE NEED IT FAST?
(TR401) Biodosimetry: Why do we need it and why do we need it fast? David J. Brenner, Columbia
University, Center for Radiological Research, New York, NY
President Obama recently remarked that while Russia’s actions are a problem, the government is
“much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in
Manhattan”. After a high-dose large-scale radiological event such as an improvised nuclear device, unless
biodosimetry can provide reasonable estimates of individual radiation doses, potential radiation mitigator
treatments may be ineffective or may even be harmful. For example, in the aftermath of the Chernobyl
accident, 13 individuals were given bone marrow transplants, of which three deaths have been identified
as direct and unnecessary sequelae of the treatment alone - since it was subsequently determined that
the individuals had received radiation doses for which transplants were not indicated.
At lower doses, where the issues relate more to accidents like Fukushima, as well as most potential “dirty
bombs” (RDDs), the need for very high throughput biodosimetry is well illustrated by the 1987 radiation
incident in Goiânia, Brazil - a city with about the same population as Manhattan. In the first few days after
the incident became known 130,000 people (~10% of the population) came for screening, of whom 20
required treatment. In any such large-scale scenario, mass radiological triage will be critical because of
the need to rapidly identify those individuals who will benefit from medical intervention, and those who
will not. Eliminating and reassuring those individuals who do not need medical intervention will be equally
crucial goals in what will be a highly resource-limited and panic-laden scenario. What emerges is the need
for very high throughput biodosimetry - analysis of tens or hundreds of thousands of samples / day. Using
standard biodosimetry methodologies, the highest throughput that can be achieved by a single lab is <500
14 | P a g e
