Search

Background: For proton therapy, a relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 has broadly been applied clinically. However, as unexpected toxicities have been observed by the end of the proton tracks, variable RBE models have been proposed. Typically, the dose‐averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) has been used as an input variable for these models but the way the LETd was defined, calculated, or determined was not always consistent, potentially impacting the corresponding RBE value. Purpose: This study compares consistently calculated LETd with other quantities as input variables for a phenomenological RBE model and attempts to determine which quantity that can best predicts proton RBE. The comparison was performed within the frame of introducing a new model for the proton RBE. Methods: High‐throughput experimental setups of in vitro cell survival studies for proton RBE determination are simulated using the SHIELD‐HIT12A Monte Carlo particle transport code. Together with LET, z∗2/β2$z^{*2}/\beta ^2$, here called effectiveQ (Qeff), and Q are scored. Each quantity is calculated using the dose and track averaging methods, because the scoring includes all hadronic particles, all protons or only primaries. A phenomenological linear‐quadratic‐based RBE model is subsequently applied to the in vitro data with the various beam quality descriptors used as input variables and the goodness of fit is determined and compared using a bootstrapping approach. Both linear and nonlinear fit functions were tested. Results: Versions of Qeff and Q outperform LET with a statistically significant margin, with the best nonlinear and linear fit having a relative root mean square error (RMSE) for RBE2Gy ± one standard error of 1.55 ± 0.04 (Qeff, t, primary) and 2.84 ± 0.07 (Qeff, d, primary), respectively. For comparison, the corresponding best nonlinear and linear fits for LETd, all protons had a relative RMSE of 2.07 ± 0.06 and 3.39 ± 0.08, respectively. Applying Welch's t‐test for comparing the calculated RMSE of RBE2Gy resulted in two‐tailed p‐values of <0.002 for all Q and Qeff quantities compared to LETd, all protons. Conclusions: The study shows that Q or Qeff could be better RBE descriptors that dose averaged LET. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. This work investigates the use of passive luminescence detectors to determine different types of averaged linear energy transfer (LET-) for the energies relevant to proton therapy. The experimental results are compared to reference values obtained from Monte Carlo simulations. Approach. Optically stimulated luminescence detectors (OSLDs), fluorescent nuclear track detectors (FNTDs), and two different groups of thermoluminescence detectors (TLDs) were irradiated at four different radiation qualities. For each irradiation, the fluence- (LET-f) and dose-averaged LET (LET-d) were determined. For both quantities, two sub-types of averages were calculated, either considering the contributions from primary and secondary protons or from all protons and heavier, charged particles. Both simulated and experimental data were used in combination with a phenomenological model to estimate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE). Main results. All types ofLET-could be assessed with the luminescence detectors. The experimental determination ofLET-fis in agreement with reference data obtained from simulations across all measurement techniques and types of averaging. On the other hand,LET-dcan present challenges as a radiation quality metric to describe the detector response in mixed particle fields. However, excluding secondaries heavier than protons from theLET-dcalculation, as their contribution to the luminescence is suppressed by ionization quenching, leads to equal accuracy betweenLET-fandLET-d. Assessment of RBE through the experimentally determinedLET-dvalues agrees with independently acquired reference values, indicating that the investigated detectors can determineLET-with sufficient accuracy for proton therapy. Significance. OSLDs, TLDs, and FNTDs can be used to determineLET-and RBE in proton therapy. With the capability to determine dose through ionization quenching corrections derived fromLET-, OSLDs and TLDs can simultaneously ascertain dose,LET-, and RBE. This makes passive detectors appealing for measurements in phantoms to facilitate validation of clinical treatment plans or experiments related to proton therapy., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)