Prediction of radiobiological response is a major challenge in radiotherapy. Of several radiobiological models, the linear-quadratic (LQ) model has been best validated by experimental and clinical data. Clinically, the LQ model is mainly used to estimate equivalent radiotherapy schedules (e.g. calculate the equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions, EQD2), but increasingly also to predict tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) using logistic models. The selection of accurate LQ parameters α, β and α/β is pivotal for a reliable estimate of radiation response. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of published values for the LQ parameters of human tumours as a guideline for radiation oncologists and radiation researchers to select appropriate radiobiological parameter values for LQ modelling in clinical radiotherapy. We performed a systematic literature search and found sixty-four clinical studies reporting α, β and α/β for tumours. Tumour site, histology, stage, number of patients, type of LQ model, radiation type, TCP model, clinical endpoint and radiobiological parameter estimates were extracted. Next, we stratified by tumour site and by tumour histology. Study heterogeneity was expressed by the I2 statistic, i.e. the percentage of variance in reported values not explained by chance. A large heterogeneity in LQ parameters was found within and between studies (I2 > 75%). For the same tumour site, differences in histology partially explain differences in the LQ parameters: epithelial tumours have higher α/β values than adenocarcinomas. For tumour sites with different histologies, such as in oesophageal cancer, the α/β estimates correlate well with histology. However, many other factors contribute to the study heterogeneity of LQ parameters, e.g. tumour stage, type of LQ model, TCP model and clinical endpoint (i.e. survival, tumour control and biochemical control). The value of LQ parameters for tumours as published in clinical radiotherapy studies depends on many clinical and methodological factors. Therefore, for clinical use of the LQ model, LQ parameters for tumour should be selected carefully, based on tumour site, histology and the applied LQ model. To account for uncertainties in LQ parameter estimates, exploring a range of values is recommended.

The therapeutic application of heat is very effective in cancer treatment. Both hyperthermia, i.e., heating to 39–45 °C to induce sensitization to radiotherapy and chemotherapy, and thermal ablation, where temperatures beyond 50 °C destroy tumor cells directly are frequently applied in the clinic. Achievement of an effective treatment requires high quality heating equipment, precise thermal dosimetry, and adequate quality assurance. Several types of devices, antennas and heating or power delivery systems have been proposed and developed in recent decades. These vary considerably in technique, heating depth, ability to focus, and in the size of the heating focus. Clinically used heating techniques involve electromagnetic and ultrasonic heating, hyperthermic perfusion and conductive heating. Depending on clinical objectives and available technology, thermal therapies can be subdivided into three broad categories: local, locoregional, or whole body heating. Clinically used local heating techniques include interstitial hyperthermia and ablation, high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), scanned focused ultrasound (SFUS), electroporation, nanoparticle heating, intraluminal heating and superficial heating. Locoregional heating techniques include phased array systems, capacitive systems and isolated perfusion. Whole body techniques focus on prevention of heat loss supplemented with energy deposition in the body, e.g., by infrared radiation. This review presents an overview of clinical hyperthermia and ablation devices used for local, locoregional, and whole body therapy. Proven and experimental clinical applications of thermal ablation and hyperthermia are listed. Methods for temperature measurement and the role of treatment planning to control treatments are discussed briefly, as well as future perspectives for heating technology for the treatment of tumors. Graphical Abstract Schematic overview of clinically proven heating techniques used for various indications and tumor locations.

Background: The aim of this study is preclinical evaluation of our newly developed regional hyperthermia system providing 3-D SAR control: the AMC-8 phased array consisting of two rings, each with four 70 MHz waveguides. It was designed to achieve higher tumour temperatures and improve the clinical effectiveness of locoregional hyperthermia. Methods: The performance of the AMC-8 system was evaluated with simulations and measurements aiming at heating a centrally located target region in rectangular (30 × 30 × 110 cm) and elliptical (36 × 24 × 80 cm) homogeneous tissue equivalent phantoms. Three properties were evaluated and compared to its predecessor, the 2-D AMC-4 single ring four waveguide array: (1) spatial control and (2) size of the SAR focus, (3) the ratio between maximum SAR outside the target region and SAR in the focus. Distance and phase difference between the two rings were varied. Results: (1) Phase steering provides 3-D SAR control for the AMC-8 system. (2) The SAR focus is more elongated compared to the AMC-4 system, yielding a lower SAR level in the focus when using the same total power. This is counter-balanced by (3) a superficial SAR deposition which is half of that in the AMC-4 system, yielding a more favourable ratio between normal tissue and target SAR and allowing higher total power and up to 30% more SAR in the focus for 3 cm ring distance. Conclusion: The AMC-8 system is capable of 3-D SAR control and its SAR distribution is more favourable than for the 2-D AMC-4 system. This result promises improvement in clinical tumour temperatures.

The currently available arsenal of anticancer modalities includes many DNA damaging agents that can kill malignant cells. However, efficient DNA repair mechanisms protect both healthy and cancer cells against the effects of treatment and contribute to the development of drug resistance. Therefore, anti-cancer treatments based on inflicting DNA damage can benefit from inhibition of DNA repair. Hyperthermia – treatment at elevated temperature – considerably affects DNA repair, among other cellular processes, and can thus sensitize (cancer) cells to DNA damaging agents. This effect has been known and clinically applied for many decades, but how heat inhibits DNA repair and which pathways are targeted has not been fully elucidated. In this review we attempt to summarize the known effects of hyperthermia on DNA repair pathways relevant in clinical treatment of cancer. Furthermore, we outline the relationships between the effects of heat on DNA repair and sensitization of cells to various DNA damaging agents.

Regions of low oxygenation (hypoxia) are a characteristic feature of solid tumors, and cells existing in these regions are a major factor influencing radiation resistance as well as playing a significant role in malignant progression. Consequently, numerous pre-clinical and clinical attempts have been made to try and overcome this hypoxia. These approaches involve improving oxygen availability, radio-sensitizing or killing the hypoxic cells, or utilizing high LET (linear energy transfer) radiation leading to a lower OER (oxygen enhancement ratio). Interestingly, hyperthermia (heat treatments of 39–45 °C) induces many of these effects. Specifically, it increases blood flow thereby improving tissue oxygenation, radio-sensitizes via DNA repair inhibition, and can kill cells either directly or indirectly by causing vascular damage. Combining hyperthermia with low LET radiation can even result in anti-tumor effects equivalent to those seen with high LET. The various mechanisms depend on the time and sequence between radiation and hyperthermia, the heating temperature, and the time of heating. We will discuss the role these factors play in influencing the interaction between hyperthermia and radiation, and summarize the randomized clinical trials showing a benefit of such a combination as well as suggest the potential future clinical application of this combination.