ImportanceTo our knowledge, there have been no clinical trials of ultra-high-dose-rate radiotherapy delivered at more than 40 Gy/sec, known as FLASH therapy, nor first-in-human use of proton FLASH.ObjectivesTo assess the clinical workflow feasibility and treatment-related toxic effects of FLASH and pain relief at the treatment sites.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn the FAST-01 nonrandomized trial, participants treated at Cincinnati Children’s/UC Health Proton Therapy Center underwent palliative FLASH radiotherapy to extremity bone metastases. Patients 18 years and older with 1 to 3 painful extremity bone metastases and life expectancies of 2 months or more were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had foot, hand, and wrist metastases; metastases locally treated in the 2 weeks prior; metal implants in the treatment field; known enhanced tissue radiosensitivity; and implanted devices at risk of malfunction with radiotherapy. One of 11 patients who consented was excluded based on eligibility. The end points were evaluated at 3 months posttreatment, and patients were followed up through death or loss to follow-up for toxic effects and pain assessments. Of the 10 included patients, 2 died after the 2-month follow-up but before the 3-month follow-up; 8 participants completed the 3-month evaluation. Data were collected from November 3, 2020, to January 28, 2022, and analyzed from January 28, 2022, to September 1, 2022.InterventionsBone metastases were treated on a FLASH-enabled (≥40 Gy/sec) proton radiotherapy system using a single-transmission proton beam. This is consistent with standard of care using the same prescription (8 Gy in a single fraction) but on a conventional-dose-rate (approximately 0.03 Gy/sec) photon radiotherapy system.Main Outcome and MeasuresMain outcomes included patient time on the treatment couch, device-related treatment delays, adverse events related to FLASH, patient-reported pain scores, and analgesic use.ResultsA total of 10 patients (age range, 27-81 years [median age, 63 years]; 5 [50%] male) underwent FLASH radiotherapy at 12 metastatic sites. There were no FLASH-related technical issues or delays. The average (range) time on the treatment couch was 18.9 (11-33) minutes per patient and 15.8 (11-22) minutes per treatment site. Median (range) follow-up was 4.8 (2.3-13.0) months. Adverse events were mild and consistent with conventional radiotherapy. Transient pain flares occurred in 4 of the 12 treated sites (33%). In 8 of the 12 sites (67%) patients reported pain relief, and in 6 of the 12 sites (50%) patients reported a complete response (no pain).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this nonrandomized trial, clinical workflow metrics, treatment efficacy, and safety data demonstrated that ultra-high-dose-rate proton FLASH radiotherapy was clinically feasible. The treatment efficacy and the profile of adverse events were comparable with those of standard-of-care radiotherapy. These findings support the further exploration of FLASH radiotherapy in patients with cancer.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04592887

Purpose Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient radiation therapy (RT) is planned without consideration of spatial heterogeneity in lung function or tumor response. We assessed the dosimetric and clinical feasibility of functional lung avoidance and response-adaptive escalation (FLARE) RT to reduce dose to [99mTc]MAA-SPECT/CT perfused lung while redistributing an escalated boost dose within [18F]FDG-PET/CT-defined biological target volumes (BTV). Methods Eight stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC patients underwent FDG-PET/CT and MAA-SPECT/CT treatment planning scans. Perfused lung objectives were derived from scatter/collimator/attenuation-corrected MAA-SPECT uptake relative to ITV-subtracted lung to maintain < 20 Gy mean lung dose (MLD). Prescriptions included 60 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) and concomitant boost of 74 Gy mean to biological target volumes (BTV=GTV+PET gradient segmentation) scaled to each BTV voxel by relative FDG-PET SUV. Dose-painting-by-numbers prescriptions were integrated into commercial treatment planning systems via uptake threshold discretization. Dose constraints for lung, heart, cord, and esophagus were defined. FLARE RT plans were optimized with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) with 3%-3mm robust optimization, and combination of PBS (avoidance) plus VMAT (escalation). The high boost dose region was evaluated within a standardized SUVpeak structure. FLARE RT plans were compared to reference VMAT plans. Linear regression between radiation dose to BTV and normalized FDG PET SUV at every voxel was conducted, from which Pearson linear correlation coefficients and regression slopes were extracted. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were estimated between radiation dose to lung and normalized SPECT uptake. Dosimetric differences between treatment modalities were evaluated by Friedman non-parametric paired test with multiple sampling correction. Results No unacceptable violations of PTV and normal tissue objectives were observed in 24 FLARE RT plans. Compared to reference VMAT plans, FLARE VMAT plans achieved a higher mean dose to BTV (73.7 Gy vs. 61.3 Gy), higher mean dose to SUVpeak (89.7 Gy vs. 60.8 Gy), and lower mean dose to highly perfused lung (7.3 Gy vs. 14.9 Gy). These dosimetric gains came at the expense of higher mean heart dose (9.4 Gy vs. 5.8 Gy) and higher maximum cord dose (50.1 Gy vs. 44.6 Gy) relative to the reference VMAT plans. Between FLARE plans, FLARE VMAT achieved higher dose to the SUVpeak ROI than FLARE PBS (89.7 Gy vs. 79.2 Gy, p = 0.01), while FLARE PBS delivered lower dose to lung than FLARE VMAT (11.9 Gy vs 15.6 Gy, p < 0.001). Voxelwise linear dose redistribution slope between BTV dose and FDG PET uptake was higher in magnitude for FLARE PBS+VMAT (0.36 Gy per %SUVmax) compared to FLARE VMAT (0.27 Gy per %SUVmax) or FLARE PBS alone (0.17 Gy per %SUVmax). Conclusions FLARE RT is clinically feasible with VMAT and PBS. A combination of PBS for functional lung avoidance and VMAT for FDG PET dose escalation balanced t...

The biological effectiveness of proton beams varies with depth, spot size and lateral distance from the beam central axis. The aim of this work is to incorporate proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and equivalent uniform dose (EUD) considerations into comparisons of broad beam and highly modulated proton minibeams. A Monte Carlo model of a small animal proton beamline is presented. Dose and variable RBE is calculated on a per-voxel basis for a range of energies (30-109 MeV). For an open beam, the RBE values at the beam entrance ranged from 1.02-1.04, at the Bragg peak (BP) from 1.3 to 1.6, and at the distal end of the BP from 1.4 to 2.0. For a 50 MeV proton beam, a minibeam collimator designed to produce uniform dose at the depth of the BP peak, had minimal impact on the open beam RBE values at depth. RBE changes were observed near the surface when the collimator was placed flush with the irradiated object, due to a higher neutron contribution derived from proton interactions with the collimator. For proton minibeams, the relative mean RBE weighted entrance dose (RWD) was ~25% lower than the physical mean dose. A strong dependency of the EUD with fraction size was observed. For 20 Gy fractions, the EUD varied widely depending on the radiosensitivity of the cells. For radiosensitive cells, the difference was up to ~50% in mean dose and ~40% in mean RWD and the EUD trended towards the valley dose rather than the mean dose. For comparative studies of uniform dose with spatially fractionated proton minibeams, EUD derived from a per-voxel RWD distribution is recommended for biological assessments of reproductive cell survival and related endpoints.