The physical properties of particles used in radiation therapy, such as protons, have been well characterized and their dose distributions are superior to photon-based treatments. However, proton therapy may also have inherent biologic advantages that have not been capitalized on. Unlike photon beams, the linear energy transfer (LET) and hence biologic effectiveness of particle beams varies along the beam path. Selective placement of areas of high effectiveness could enhance tumor cell kill and simultaneously spare normal tissues. However, previous methods for mapping spatial variations in biologic effectiveness are time-consuming and often yield inconsistent results with large uncertainties. Thus the data needed to accurately model relative biological effectiveness to guide novel treatment planning approaches are limited. We used Monte Carlo modeling and high-content automated clonogenic survival assays to spatially map the biologic effectiveness of scanned proton beams with high accuracy and throughput while minimizing biological uncertainties. We found that the relationship between cell kill, dose and LET, is complex and non-unique. Measured biologic effects were substantially greater than in most previous reports, and non-linear surviving fraction response was observed even for the highest LET values. Extension of this approach could generate data needed to optimize proton therapy plans incorporating variable RBE.

Purpose: The motivation of this study was to find and eliminate the cause of errors in dose‐averaged linear energy transfer (LET) calculations from therapeutic protons in small targets, such as biological cell layers, calculated using the geant 4 Monte Carlo code. Furthermore, the purpose was also to provide a recommendation to select an appropriate LET quantity from geant 4 simulations to correlate with biological effectiveness of therapeutic protons.Methods: The authors developed a particle tracking step based strategy to calculate the average LET quantities (track‐averaged LET, LET_t and dose‐averaged LET, LET_d) using geant 4 for different tracking step size limits. A step size limit refers to the maximally allowable tracking step length. The authors investigated how the tracking step size limit influenced the calculated LET_t and LET_d of protons with six different step limits ranging from 1 to 500 μm in a water phantom irradiated by a 79.7‐MeV clinical proton beam. In addition, the authors analyzed the detailed stochastic energy deposition information including fluence spectra and dose spectra of the energy‐deposition‐per‐step of protons. As a reference, the authors also calculated the averaged LET and analyzed the LET spectra combining the Monte Carlo method and the deterministic method. Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) calculations were performed to illustrate the impact of different LET calculation methods on the RBE‐weighted dose.Results: Simulation results showed that the step limit effect was small for LET_t but significant for LET_d. This resulted from differences in the energy‐deposition‐per‐step between the fluence spectra and dose spectra at different depths in the phantom. Using the Monte Carlo particle tracking method in geant 4 can result in incorrect LET_d calculation results in the dose plateau region for small step limits. The erroneous LET_d results can be attributed to the algorithm to determine fluctuations in energy deposition along the tracking step in geant 4. The incorrect LET_d values lead to substantial differences in the calculated RBE.Conclusions: When the geant 4 particle tracking method is used to calculate the average LET values within targets with a small step limit, such as smaller than 500 μm, the authors recommend the use of LET_t in the dose plateau region and LET_d around the Bragg peak. For a large step limit, i.e., 500 μm, LET_d is recommended along the whole Bragg curve. The transition point depends on beam parameters and can be found by determining the location where the gradient of the ratio of LET_d and LET_t becomes positive.

Background: The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for particle therapy is a complex function of particle type, radiation dose, linear energy transfer (LET), cell type, endpoint, etc. In the clinical practice of proton therapy, the RBE is assumed to have a fixed value of 1.1. This assumption, along with the effects of physical uncertainties, may mean that the biologically effective dose distributions received by the patient may be significantly different from what is seen on treatment plans. This may contribute to unforeseen toxicities and/or failure to control the disease. Variability of Proton RBE: It has been shown experimentally that proton RBE varies significantly along the beam path, especially near the end of the particle range. While there is now an increasing acceptance that proton RBE is variable, there is an ongoing debate about whether to change the current clinical practice. Clinical Evidence: A rationale against the change is the uncertainty in the models of variable RBE. Secondly, so far there is no clear clinical evidence of the harm of assuming proton RBE to be 1.1. It is conceivable, however, that the evidence is masked partially by physical uncertainties. It is, therefore, plausible that reduction in uncertainties and their incorporation in the estimation of dose actually delivered may isolate and reveal the variability of RBE in clinical practice. Nevertheless, clinical evidence of RBE variability is slowly emerging as more patients are treated with protons and their response data are analyzed. Modelling and Incorporation of RBE in the Optimization of Proton Therapy: The improvement in the knowledge of RBE could lead to better understanding of outcomes of proton therapy and in the improvement of models to predict RBE. Prospectively, the incorporation of such models in the optimization of intensity-modulated proton therapy could lead to improvements in the therapeutic ratio of proton therapy.

Helium ion beam therapy for the treatment of cancer was one of several developed and studied particle treatments in the 1950s, leading to clinical trials beginning in 1975 at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The trial shutdown was followed by decades of research and clinical silence on the topic while proton and carbon ion therapy made debuts at research facilities and academic hospitals worldwide. The lack of progression in understanding the principle facets of helium ion beam therapy in terms of physics, biological and clinical findings persists today, mainly attributable to its highly limited availability. Despite this major setback, there is an increasing focus on evaluating and establishing clinical and research programs using helium ion beams, with both therapy and imaging initiatives to supplement the clinical palette of radiotherapy in the treatment of aggressive disease and sensitive clinical cases. Moreover, due its intermediate physical and radio-biological properties between proton and carbon ion beams, helium ions may provide a streamlined economic steppingstone towards an era of widespread use of different particle species in light and heavy ion therapy. With respect to the clinical proton beams, helium ions exhibit superior physical properties such as reduced lateral scattering and range straggling with higher relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and dose-weighted linear energy transfer (LET_d) ranging from ∼4 keV μm⁻¹ to ∼40 keV μm⁻¹. In the frame of heavy ion therapy using carbon, oxygen or neon ions, where LET_d increases beyond 100 keV μm⁻¹, helium ions exhibit similar physical attributes such as a sharp lateral penumbra, however, with reduced radio-biological uncertainties and without potentially spoiling dose distributions due to excess fragmentation of heavier ion beams, particularly for higher penetration depths. This roadmap presents an overview of the current state-of-the-art and future directions of helium ion therapy: understanding physics and improving modeling, understanding biology and improving modeling, imaging techniques using helium ions and refining and establishing clinical approaches and aims from learned experience with protons. These topics are organized and presented into three main sections, outlining current and future tasks in establishing clinical and research programs using helium ion beams—A. Physics B. Biological and C. Clinical Perspectives.

Large amounts of high quality biophysical data are needed to improve current biological effects models but such data are lacking and difficult to obtain. The present study aimed to more efficiently measure the spatial distribution of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of charged particle beams using a novel high-accuracy and high-throughput experimental platform. Clonogenic survival was selected as the biological endpoint for two lung cancer cell lines, H460 and H1437, irradiated with protons, carbon, and helium ions. Ion-specific multi-step microplate holders were fabricated such that each column of a 96-well microplate is spatially situated at a different location along a particle beam path. Dose, dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LET_d), and dose-mean lineal energy (y_d) were calculated using an experimentally validated Geant4-based Monte Carlo system. Cells were irradiated at the Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT). The experimental results showed that the clonogenic survival curves of all tested ions were y_d-dependent. Both helium and carbon ions achieved maximum RBEs within specific y_d ranges before biological efficacy declined, indicating an overkill effect. For protons, no overkill was observed, but RBE increased distal to the Bragg peak. Measured RBE profiles strongly depend on the physical characteristics such as y_d and are ion specific.