Low dose lung radiation therapy for pneumonia: an examination of historical dose distributions.

The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, that causes the COVID-19 disease currently has healthcare systems around the world dealing with unprecedented numbers of critically ill patients. One of the primary concerns associated with this illness is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and the pneumonia that accompanies it. Historical literature dating back to the 1940s and earlier contains many reports of successful treatment of pneumonias with ionizing radiation. Although these were not randomized controlled trials, they do suggest a potential avenue for further investigation. Technical details in these reports however were limited. In this work we review the literature and identify details including nominal kilovoltage ranges, filtration, and focus-skin distances (FSDs). Using a freely available and benchmarked code, we generated spectra and used these as sources for Monte Carlo simulations using the EGSnrc software package. The approximate sources were projected through a radiologically anthropomorphic phantom to provide detailed dose distributions within a targeted lung volume (approximate right middle lobe). After accounting for the reported exposure levels, mean lung doses fell in a relatively narrow range: 30-80 cGy. Variation in patient dimensions and other details are expected to result in an uncertainty on the order of ± 20%. This result is consistent with the dose range expected to induce anti-inflammatory effects.

What Conditions Make Proton Beam Therapy Financially Viable in Western Canada?

Background Proton beam therapy (PBT) is available in many western and Asian countries, but there is no clinical, gantry-based PBT facility in Canada. Methods A cost analysis was conducted from the Alberta Ministry of Health perspective with a 15-year horizon. Estimated costs were: PBT unit, facility development as part of an ongoing capital project, electricity, maintenance contract, and staffing. Revenues were: savings from stopping USA referrals, avoiding the costs of standard radiation therapy (RT) for Albertans receiving PBT instead, and cost-recovery charges for out-of-province patients. Results The Ministry of Health funded 15 Albertans for PBT in the USA in the 2014/15 fiscal year (mean CAD$ 237,348/patient). A single-vault, compact PBT unit operating 10 hours/day could treat 250 patients annually. A 100 Albertans, with accepted indications, such as the curative-intent treatment of chordomas, ocular melanomas, and selected pediatric cancers, would likely benefit annually from PBT's improved conformality and/or reduced integral dose compared to RT. The estimated capital cost was $40 million for a single beamline built within an ongoing capital project. Operating costs were $4.8 million/year at capacity. With 50% capacity reserved for non-Albertans at a cost recovery of $45,000/patient, a Western Canadian PBT facility would achieve net positive cash flow by year eight of clinical operations, assuming Alberta-to-USA referrals reach 21 patients/year by 2024 and increase at 3%/year thereafter. Sensitivity analysis indicates the lifetime net savings is robust to the assumptions made. Conclusion This business case, based on Canadian costing data and estimates, demonstrates the potential for a financially viable PBT facility in Western Canada.

Assessment of extended-field radiotherapy for stage IIIC endometrial cancer using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and helical tomotherapy.

PURPOSE: To perform a dosimetric comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and helical tomotherapy (HT) plans for pelvic and para-aortic RT in postoperative endometrial cancer patients; and to evaluate the integral dose (ID) received by critical structures within the radiation fields. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We selected 10 patients with Stage IIIC endometrial cancer. For each patient, three plans were created with 3D-CRT, IMRT, and HT. The IMRT and HT plans were both optimized to keep the mean dose to the planning target volume (PTV) the same as that with 3D-CRT. The dosimetry and ID for the critical structures were compared. A paired two-tailed Student t test was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Compared with the 3D-CRT plans, the IMRT plans resulted in lower IDs in the organs at risk (OARs), ranging from -3.49% to -17.59%. The HT plans showed a similar result except that the ID for the bowel increased 0.27%. The IMRT and HT plans both increased the IDs to normal tissue (see Table 1 and text for definition), pelvic bone, and spine (range, 3.31-19.7%). The IMRT and HT dosimetry showed superior PTV coverage and better OAR sparing than the 3D-CRT dosimetry. Compared directly with IMRT, HT showed similar PTV coverage, lower Ids, and a decreased dose to most OARs. CONCLUSION: Intensity-modulated RT and HT appear to achieve excellent PTV coverage and better sparing of OARs, but at the expense of increased IDs to normal tissue and skeleton. HT allows for additional improvement in dosimetry and sparing of most OARs.