FLASH radiation therapy (RT) is a promising new paradigm in radiation oncology. However, a major question that remains is the robustness and reproducibility of the FLASH effect when different irradiators are used on animals or patients with different genetic backgrounds, diets, and microbiomes, all of which can influence the effects of radiation on normal tissues. To address questions of rigor and reproducibility across different centers, we analyzed independent data sets from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and from Lausanne University (CHUV). Both centers investigated acute effects after total abdominal irradiation to C57BL/6 animals delivered by the FLASH Mobetron system. The two centers used similar beam parameters but otherwise conducted the studies independently. The FLASH-enabled animal survival and intestinal crypt regeneration after irradiation were comparable between the two centers. These findings, together with previously published data using a converted linear accelerator, show that a robust and reproducible FLASH effect can be induced as long as the same set of irradiation parameters are used.

Recent preclinical evidence has shown that ionizing radiation given at an ultra-high dose rate (UHDR), also known as FLASH radiation therapy (FLASH-RT), can selectively reduce radiation injury to normal tissue while remaining isoeffective to conventional radiation therapy (CONV-RT) with respect to tumor killing. Unresectable pancreatic cancer is challenging to control without ablative doses of radiation, but this is difficult to achieve without significant gastrointestinal toxicity. In this review article, we explore the propsed mechanisms of FLASH-RT and its tissue-sparing effect, as well as its relevance and suitability for the treatment of pancreatic cancer. We also briefly discuss the challenges with regard to dosimetry, dose rate, and fractionation for using FLASH-RT to treat this disease.

Background and purpose: FLASH or ultra‐high dose rate (UHDR) radiation therapy (RT) has gained attention in recent years for its ability to spare normal tissues relative to conventional dose rate (CDR) RT in various preclinical trials. However, clinical implementation of this promising treatment option has been limited because of the lack of availability of accelerators capable of delivering UHDR RT. Commercial options are finally reaching the market that produce electron beams with average dose rates of up to 1000 Gy/s. We established a framework for the acceptance, commissioning, and periodic quality assurance (QA) of electron FLASH units and present an example of commissioning.Methods: A protocol for acceptance, commissioning, and QA of UHDR linear accelerators was established by combining and adapting standards and professional recommendations for standard linear accelerators based on the experience with UHDR at four clinical centers that use different UHDR devices. Non‐standard dosimetric beam parameters considered included pulse width, pulse repetition frequency, dose per pulse, and instantaneous dose rate, together with recommendations on how to acquire these measurements.Results: The 6‐ and 9‐MeV beams of an UHDR electron device were commissioned by using this developed protocol. Measurements were acquired with a combination of ion chambers, beam current transformers (BCTs), and dose‐rate–independent passive dosimeters. The unit was calibrated according to the concept of redundant dosimetry using a reference setup.Conclusion: This study provides detailed recommendations for the acceptance testing, commissioning, and routine QA of low‐energy electron UHDR linear accelerators. The proposed framework is not limited to any specific unit, making it applicable to all existing eFLASH units in the market. Through practical insights and theoretical discourse, this document establishes a benchmark for the commissioning of UHDR devices for clinical use.