International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*PhysicsCancer BiologyPeer-reviewed journal article
Discordance in acute gastrointestinal toxicity between synchrotron-based proton and linac-based electron ultra-high dose rate irradiation
Kevin LiuiD, Uwe TittiD, Nolan EspleniD, Luke ConnelliD, Elise KonradssoniD, Ming YangiD, Xiaochun WangiD, Takeshi Takaoka, Ziyi LiiD, Albert C. KoongiD, Devarati MitraiD, Radhe MohaniD, Billy W. LooiD, Steven Hsesheng LiniD, Emil SchüleriD
Abstract
PurposeProton FLASH has been investigated using cyclotron and synchrocyclotron beamlines but not synchrotron beamlines. We evaluated the impact of dose rate (ultra-high [UHDR] vs. conventional [CONV]) and beam configuration (shoot-through [ST] vs. spread-out-Bragg-peak [SOBP]) on acute radiation-induced gastrointestinal toxicity (RIGIT) in mice. We also compared RIGIT between synchrotron-based protons and linac-based electrons with matched mean dose rates. Methods and MaterialsWe administered abdominal irradiation (12-14 Gy single fraction) to female C57BL/6J mice with an 87 MeV synchrotron-based proton beamline (2 cm diameter field size as a lateral beam). Dose rates were 0.2 Gy/s (S-T pCONV), 0.3 Gy/s (SOBP pCONV), 150 Gy/s (S-T pFLASH), and 230 Gy/s (SOBP pFLASH). RIGIT was assessed by the jejunal regenerating crypt assay and survival. We also compared responses to proton [pFLASH and pCONV] with responses to electron CONV (eCONV, 0.4 Gy/s) and electron FLASH (eFLASH, 188-205 Gy/s). ResultsThe number of regenerating jejunal crypts at each matched dose was lowest for pFLASH (similar between S-T and SOBP), greater and similar between pCONV (S-T and SOBP) and eCONV, and greatest for eFLASH. Correspondingly, mice that received pFLASH SOBP had the lowest survival rates (50% at 50 days), followed by pFLASH S-T (80%), and pCONV SOBP (90%), but 100% of mice receiving pCONV S-T survived (log-rank P = 0.047 for the four groups). ConclusionsOur findings are consistent with an increase in RIGIT after synchrotron-based pFLASH versus pCONV. This negative proton-specific FLASH effect versus linac-based electron irradiation underscores the importance of understanding the physical and biological factors that will allow safe and effective clinical translation.
- Citations
- 21
- FWCI
- 5.75
- Field percentile
- top 3%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- FLASH or flare: variable intestinal toxicity results in a mouse model following proton pencil beam scanning irradiation on a clinical superconducting synchrocyclotron
Eva Bogaerts, Ellina Macaeva, … Edmond Sterpin·bioRxiv·Sep 17, 2025
- Redefining FLASH RT: the impact of mean dose rate and dose per pulse in the gastrointestinal tract
Kevin Liu, Trey Waldrop, … Emil Schüler·bioRxiv·Apr 19, 2024
- FLASH proton reirradiation, with or without hypofractionation, mitigates chronic toxicity in the normal murine intestine, skin, and bone.
Ioannis I. Verginadis, Anastasia P. Velalopoulou, … Theresa M. Busch·Radiotherapy and OncologyPeer-reviewed·Jan 27, 2025
- The Flash Mode of Proton Irradiation in the Bragg Peak Partly Spares the Embryogenesis of the Quail
S. V. Akulinichev, S. I. Glukhov, … I. A. Yakovlev·bioRxiv·Jan 27, 2024
- Decrease in dose per fraction impairs the FLASH sparing effect in murine intestine model
Anouk Sesink, R. Geyer, … Veljko Grilj·Radiotherapy and OncologyPeer-reviewed·Nov 3, 2025
- Proton FLASH preserves neurocognition across delivery techniques: implications for clinical translation in pediatric brain tumors
Devin Miles, Daniel Sforza, … Sahaja Acharya·bioRxiv·Jun 2, 2026