Search

Background: Ultrahigh dose‐rate irradiation (FLASH‐IR) was reported to be efficient in tumor control while reducing normal tissue radiotoxicity. However, the mechanism of such phenomenon is still unclear. Besides, the FLASH experiments using high energy X‐ray, the most common modality in clinical radiotherapy, are rarely reported. This study aims to investigate the radiobiological response using 6 MV X‐ray FLASH‐IR or conventional dose‐rate IR (CONV‐IR). Methods: The superconducting linac of Chengdu THz Free Electron Laser (CTFEL) facility was used for FLASH‐IR, a diamond radiation detector and a CeBr3 scintillation detector were used to monitor the time structure and dose rate of FLASH pulses. BALB/c nude mice received whole abdominal 6 MV X‐ray FLASH‐IR or CONV‐IR, the prescribed dose was 15 Gy or 10 Gy and the delivered absolute dose was monitored with EBT3 films. The mice were either euthanized 24 h post‐IR to evaluate acute tissue responses or followed up for 6 weeks to observe late‐stage responses and survival probability. Complete blood count, histological analyses, and measurement of cytokine expression and redox status were performed. Results: The mean dose rate of >150 Gy/s and instantaneous dose rate of >5.5 × 105 Gy/s was reached in FLASH‐IR at the center of mice body. After 6 weeks' follow‐up of mice that received 15 Gy IR, the FLASH group showed faster body weight recovery and higher survival probability than the CONV group. Histological analysis showed that FLASH‐IR induced less acute intestinal damage than CONV‐IR. Complete blood count and cytokine concentration measurement found that the inflammatory blood cell counts and pro‐inflammatory cytokine concentrations were elevated at the acute stage after both FLASH‐IR and CONV‐IR. However, FLASH irradiated mice had significantly fewer inflammatory blood cells and diminished pro‐inflammatory cytokine at the late stage. Moreover, higher reactive oxygen species (ROS) signal intensities but significantly reduced lipid peroxidation were found in the FLASH group than in the CONV group in the acute stage. Conclusions: The radioprotective effect of 6 MV X‐ray FLASH‐IR was observed. The differences in inflammatory responses and redox status between the two groups may be the factors responsible for reduced radiotoxicities following FLASH‐IR. Further studies are required to thoroughly evaluate the impact of ROS on FLASH effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]