Katalog Plus
Bibliothek der Frankfurt UAS
Bald neuer Katalog: sichern Sie sich schon vorab Ihre persönlichen Merklisten im Nutzerkonto: Anleitung.
Dieses Ergebnis aus BASE kann Gästen nicht angezeigt werden.  Login für vollen Zugriff.

Initial Evaluation of Feasibility and Cutaneous Toxicity of Electron FLASH Radiotherapy Using a Standard-of-Care Fractionation Scheme in a Porcine Skin Model

Title: Initial Evaluation of Feasibility and Cutaneous Toxicity of Electron FLASH Radiotherapy Using a Standard-of-Care Fractionation Scheme in a Porcine Skin Model
Authors: Elise Konradsson; Kevin Liu; Safee Baig; Susanne Je-Han Lin; Alan Hernandez Lopez; Brett Velasquez; Stephanie Mayor; Kayla Samuel; Traci Viscarra; Krystal Garrow; Erica J. Moore; William Norton; Jody Swain; Ziyi Li; Albert C. Koong; Steven H. Lin; Emil Schüler; Devarati Mitra
Source: Cancers ; Volume 18 ; Issue 6 ; Pages: 1009
Publisher Information: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
Publication Year: 2026
Collection: MDPI Open Access Publishing
Subject Terms: ultra-high dose rate; FLASH; electron; large animal; normal tissue
Description: Background/Objectives: FLASH radiotherapy (RT) has shown potential to reduce normal tissue toxicity compared with conventional (CONV) RT while maintaining tumor control. FLASH RT is characterized by ultra-high dose rate delivery, commonly using mean dose rates ≥ 40 Gy/s and sub-second delivery times. Most preclinical studies have used single-fraction regimens, leaving the feasibility and normal tissue impact of clinically relevant fractionation largely unexplored. We evaluated electron FLASH RT given in a standard five-fraction regimen to a porcine skin model, simulating adjuvant treatment workflow for high-risk cutaneous melanoma. Method: Three Yorkshire–Landrace swine received paired five-fraction electron irradiations to dorsolateral skin using either FLASH RT (mean dose rates 175–246 Gy/s) or CONV RT (8 Gy/min). Radiation was delivered with a 9-MeV electron beam; field diameters of 4, 7, or 10 cm; and doses of 5 × 6, 5 × 7, or 5 × 8 Gy. Dosimetry was validated with several dosimeters and real-time beam monitoring, confirming dose accuracy within 3%. Skin toxicity was assessed over 22–24 weeks using clinical grading, erythema spectrophotometry, and histopathologic evaluation. Results: FLASH RT was well tolerated at 5 × 6 Gy and 5 × 7 Gy, with no significant differences in peak radiation dermatitis, erythema index, or histologic damage compared with CONV RT. At 5 × 8 Gy, both modalities caused unacceptable toxicity, including moist desquamation and necrosis. No volume-dependent effects were observed. Conclusions: Although a FLASH-specific normal tissue sparing effect was not observed, this study demonstrates the technical feasibility and safety of delivering fractionated electron FLASH RT in a large animal model using a clinically relevant workflow. These findings support further investigation of physical beam parameters and biological modifiers, such as tissue oxygenation, and inform the clinical translation of fractionated FLASH RT for cutaneous malignancies.
Document Type: text
File Description: application/pdf
Language: English
Relation: Cancer Therapy; https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers18061009
DOI: 10.3390/cancers18061009
Availability: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18061009
Rights: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Accession Number: edsbas.3D618AC
Database: BASE