We investigated the influence of PD-1 expression on the systemic antitumor response (abscopal effect) induced by stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in preclinical melanoma and renal cell carcinoma models. We compared the SABRinduced antitumor response in PD-1-expressing wild-type (WT) and PD-1-deficient knockout (KO) mice and found that PD-1 expression compromises the survival of tumor-bearing mice treated with SABR. None of the PD-1 WT mice survived beyond 25 days, whereas 20% of the PD-1 KO mice survived beyond 40 days. Similarly, PD-1-blocking antibody in WT mice was able to recapitulate SABR-induced antitumor responses observed in PD-1 KO mice and led to increased survival. The combination of SABR plus PD-1 blockade induced near complete regression of the irradiated primary tumor (synergistic effect), as opposed to SABR alone or SABR plus control antibody. The combination of SABR plus PD-1 blockade therapy elicited a 66% reduction in size of nonirradiated, secondary tumors outside the SABR radiation field (abscopal effect). The observed abscopal effect was tumor specific and was not dependent on tumor histology or host genetic background. The CD11a high CD8 þ T-cell phenotype identifies a tumor-reactive population, which was associated in frequency and function with a SABR-induced antitumor immune response in PD-1 KO mice. We conclude that SABR induces an abscopal tumorspecific immune response in both the irradiated and nonirradiated tumors, which is potentiated by PD-1 blockade. The combination of SABR and PD-1 blockade has the potential to translate into a potent immunotherapy strategy in the management of patients with metastatic cancer.

The treatment of cancer with proton radiation therapy was first suggested in 1946 followed by the first treatments in the 1950s. As of 2020, almost 200 000 patients have been treated with proton beams worldwide and the number of operating proton therapy (PT) facilities will soon reach one hundred. PT has long moved from research institutions into hospital-based facilities that are increasingly being utilized with workflows similar to conventional radiation therapy. While PT has become mainstream and has established itself as a treatment option for many cancers, it is still an area of active research for various reasons: the advanced dose shaping capabilities of PT cause susceptibility to uncertainties, the high degrees of freedom in dose delivery offer room for further improvements, the limited experience and understanding of optimizing pencil beam scanning, and the biological effect difference compared to photon radiation. In addition to these challenges and opportunities currently being investigated, there is an economic aspect because PT treatments are, on average, still more expensive compared to conventional photon based treatment options. This roadmap highlights the current state and future direction in PT categorized into four different themes, 'improving efficiency', 'improving planning and delivery', 'improving imaging', and 'improving patient selection'.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) formed Task Group 221 (TG-221) to discuss a generalized commissioning process, quality management considerations, and clinical physics practice standards for ocular plaque brachytherapy. The purpose of this report is also, in part, to aid the clinician to implement recommendations of the AAPM TG-129 report, which placed emphasis on dosimetric considerations for ocular brachytherapy applicators used in the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS). This report is intended to assist medical physicists in establishing a new ocular brachytherapy program and, for existing programs, in reviewing and updating clinical practices. The report scope includes photon-and beta-emitting sources and source:applicator combinations. Dosimetric studies for photon and beta sources are reviewed to summarize the salient issues and provide references for additional study. The components of an ocular plaque brachytherapy quality management program are discussed, including radiation safety considerations, source calibration methodology, applicator commissioning, imaging quality assurance tests for treatment planning, treatment planning strategies, and treatment planning system commissioning. Finally, specific guidelines for commissioning an ocular plaque brachytherapy program, clinical physics practice standards in ocular plaque brachytherapy, and other areas reflecting the need for specialized treatment planning systems, measurement phantoms, and detectors (among other topics) to support the clinical practice of ocular brachytherapy are presented. Expected future advances and developments for ocular brachytherapy are discussed.

The SOI microdosimeter with its well-defined 3D SV has applicability in characterizing proton radiation fields and can measure relevant physical parameters to model the RBE with submillimeter spatial resolution. It has been shown that for a physical dose of 1.82 Gy at the BP, the derived RBE based on the MKM model increased from 1.14 to 1.6 in the BP and its distal part. Good agreement was observed between the experimental and simulation results, confirming the potential application of SOI microdosimeter with 3D SV for quality assurance in proton therapy.

An accurate model for BDT prediction was achieved by using the experimentally determined proton beam therapy delivery parameters, which may be useful in modeling the interplay effect and patient throughput. The model may provide guidance on how to effectively reduce BDT and may be used to identifying deteriorating machine performance.