Objective: Recent in vivo results have shown prominent tissue sparing effect of radiotherapy with ultra-high dose rates (FLASH) compared to conventional dose rates (CONV). Oxygen depletion has been proposed as the underlying mechanism, but in vitro data to support this have been lacking. The aim of the current study was to compare FLASH to CONV irradiation under different oxygen concentrations in vitro. Methods: Prostate cancer cells were irradiated at different oxygen concentrations (relative partial pressure ranging between 1.6 and 20%) with a 10 MeV electron beam at a dose rate of either 600 Gy/s (FLASH) or 14 Gy/min (CONV), using a modified clinical linear accelerator. We evaluated the surviving fraction of cells using clonogenic assays after irradiation with doses ranging from 0 to 25 Gy. Results: Under normoxic conditions, no differences between FLASH and CONV irradiation were found. For hypoxic cells (1.6%), the radiation response was similar up to a dose of about 5–10 Gy, above which increased survival was shown for FLASH compared to CONV irradiation. The increased survival was shown to be significant at 18 Gy, and the effect was shown to depend on oxygen concentration. Conclusion: The in vitro FLASH effect depends on oxygen concentration. Further studies to characterize and optimize the use of FLASH in order to widen the therapeutic window are indicated. Advances in knowledge: This paper shows in vitro evidence for the role of oxygen concentration underlying the difference between FLASH and CONV irradiation.

Background: Irradiation with ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) has been shown to spare normal tissue without hampering tumor control in several in vivo studies. Few cell lines have been investigated in vitro, and previous results are inconsistent. Assuming that oxygen depletion accounts for the FLASH sparing effect, no sparing should appear for cells irradiated with low doses in normoxia.Methods: Seven cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-231, MCF7, WiDr, LU-HNSCC4, HeLa [early passage and subclone]) and normal lung fibroblasts (MRC-5) were irradiated with doses ranging from 0 to 12 Gy using FLASH (≥800 Gy/s) or conventional dose rates (CONV, 14 Gy/min), with a 10 MeV electron beam from a clinical linear accelerator. Surviving fraction (SF) was determined with clonogenic assays. Three cell lines were further studied for radiation-induced DNA-damage foci using a 53BP1-marker and for cell cycle synchronization after irradiation.Results: A tendency of increased survival following FLASH compared with CONV was suggested for all cell lines, with significant differences for 4/7 cell lines. The magnitude of the FLASH-sparing expressed as a dose-modifying factor at SF=0.1 was around 1.1 for 6/7 cell lines and around 1.3 for the HeLa_subclone. Similar cell cycle distributions and 53BP1-foci numbers were found comparing FLASH to CONV.Conclusion: We have found a FLASH effect appearing at low doses under normoxic conditions for several cell lines in vitro. The magnitude of the FLASH effect differed between the cell lines, suggesting inherited biological susceptibilities for FLASH irradiation.

Background: The prescribed radiation dose to patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is standardized, even if the prognosis for individual patients may differ. Easy-at-hand pre-treatment risk stratification methods are valuable to individualize therapy. In the current study we assessed the prognostic impact of primary tumor volume for p16-positive and p16-negative tumors and in relationship to other prognostic factors for outcome in patients with OPSCC treated with primary radiation therapy (RT). Methods: Five hundred twenty-three OPSCC patients with p16-status treated with primary RT (68.0 Gy to 73.1 Gy in 7 weeks, or 68.0 Gy in 4.5 weeks), with or without concurrent chemotherapy, within three prospective trials were included in the study. Local failure (LF), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in relationship to the size of the primary gross tumor volume (GTV-T) and other prognostic factors were investigated. Efficiency of intensified RT (RT with total dose 73.1 Gy or given within 4.5 weeks) was analyzed in relationship to tumor volume. Results: The volume of GTV-T and p16-status were found to be the strongest prognostic markers for LF, PFS and OS. For p16-positive tumors, an increase in tumor volume had a significantly higher negative prognostic impact compared with p16-negative tumors. Within a T-classification, patients with a smaller tumor, compared with a larger tumor, had a better prognosis. The importance of tumor volume remained after adjusting for nodal status, age, performance status, smoking status, sex, and hemoglobin-level. The adjusted hazard ratio for OS per cm³ increase in tumor volume was 2.3% (95% CI 0–4.9) for p16-positive and 1.3% (95% 0.3–2.2) for p16-negative. Exploratory analyses suggested that intensified RT could mitigate the negative impact of a large tumor volume. Conclusions: Outcome for patients with OPSCC treated with RT is largely determined by tumor volume, even when adjusting for other established prognostic factors. Tumor volume is significantly more influential for patients with p16-positive tumors. Patients with large tumor volumes might benefit by intensified RT to improve survival.