UHDpulse - Metrology for advanced radiotherapy using particle beams with ultra-high pulse dose rates is a recently started European Joint Research Project with the aim to develop and improve dosimetry standards for FLASH radiotherapy, very high energy electron (VHEE) radiotherapy and laser-driven medical accelerators. This paper gives a short overview about the current state of developments of radiotherapy with FLASH electrons and protons, very high energy electrons as well as laser-driven particles and the related challenges in dosimetry due to the ultra-high dose rate during the short radiation pulses. We summarize the objectives and plans of the UHDpulse project and present the 16 participating partners.

The development of innovative approaches that would reduce the sensitivity of healthy tissues to irradiation while maintaining the efficacy of the treatment on the tumor is of crucial importance for the progress of the efficacy of radiotherapy. Recent methodological developments and innovations, such as scanned beams, ultra-high dose rates, and very high-energy electrons, which may be simultaneously available on new accelerators, would allow for possible radiobiological advantages of very short pulses of ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) therapy for radiation therapy to be considered. In particular, very high-energy electron (VHEE) radiotherapy, in the energy range of 100 to 250 MeV, first proposed in the 2000s, would be particularly interesting both from a ballistic and biological point of view for the establishment of this new type of irradiation technique. In this review, we examine and summarize the current knowledge on VHEE radiotherapy and provide a synthesis of the studies that have been published on various experimental and simulation works. We will also consider the potential for VHEE therapy to be translated into clinical contexts.

After years of lethargy, studies on two non-conventional microstructures in time and space of the beams used in radiation therapy are enjoying a huge revival. The first effect called “FLASH” is based on very high dose-rate irradiation (pulse amplitude ≥106 Gy/s), short beam-on times (≤100 ms) and large single doses (≥10 Gy) as experimental parameters established so far to give biological and potential clinical effects. The second effect relies on the use of arrays of minibeams (e.g., 0.5–1 mm, spaced 1–3.5 mm). Both approaches have been shown to protect healthy tissues as an endpoint that must be clearly specified and could be combined with each other (e.g., minibeams under FLASH conditions). FLASH depends on the presence of oxygen and could proceed from the chemistry of peroxyradicals and a reduced incidence on DNA and membrane damage. Minibeams action could be based on abscopal effects, cell signalling and/or migration of cells between “valleys and hills” present in the non-uniform irradiation field as well as faster repair of vascular damage. Both effects are expected to maintain intact the tumour control probability and might even preserve antitumoural immunological reactions. FLASH in vivo experiments involving Zebrafish, mice, pig and cats have been done with electron beams, while minibeams are an intermediate approach between X-GRID and synchrotron X-ray microbeams radiation. Both have an excellent rationale to converge and be applied with proton beams, combining focusing properties and high dose rates in the beam path of pencil beams, and the inherent advantage of a controlled limited range. A first treatment with electron FLASH (cutaneous lymphoma) has recently been achieved, but clinical trials have neither been presented for FLASH with protons, nor under the minibeam conditions. Better understanding of physical, chemical and biological mechanisms of both effects is essential to optimize the technical developments and devise clinical trials.

Stopping-power ratios (SPRs) are used in particle therapy to calculate particle range in patients. The heuristic CT-to-SPR conversion (Hounsfield Look-Up-Table, HLUT), needed for treatment planning, depends on CT-scan and reconstruction parameters as well as the specific HLUT definition. To assess inter-centre differences in these parameters, we performed a survey-based qualitative evaluation, as a first step towards better standardisation of CT-based SPR derivation. A questionnaire was sent to twelve particle therapy centres (ten from Europe and two from USA). It asked for details on CT scanners, image acquisition and reconstruction, definition of the HLUT, body-region specific HLUT selection, investigations of beam-hardening and experimental validations of the HLUT. Technological improvements were rated regarding their potential to improve SPR accuracy. Scan parameters and HLUT definition varied widely. Either the stoichiometric method (eight centres) or a tissue-substitute-only HLUT definition (three centres) was used. One centre combined both methods. The number of HLUT line segments varied widely between two and eleven. Nine centres had investigated influence of beam-hardening, often including patient-size dependence. Ten centres had validated their HLUT experimentally, with very different validation schemes. Most centres deemed dual-energy CT promising for improving SPR accuracy. Large inter-centre variability was found in implementation of CT scans, image reconstruction and especially in specification of the CT-to-SPR conversion. A future standardisation would reduce time-intensive institution-specific efforts and variations in treatment quality. Due to the interdependency of multiple parameters, no conclusion can be drawn on the derived SPR accuracy and its inter-centre variability.