Retrospective Analysis of the Areas Responsible for Light Flash and Odor During Proton Beam Therapy and Photon Therapy.

Background Abnormal sensations were frequently experienced by patients who received irradiation of the brain or head and neck region. We have previously suggested correlations with irradiation of the nasal cavity and retina. Purpose We performed a retrospective dose-volume histogram analysis focused on the brain and head and neck tumor to examine the relationship between these abnormal sensations and the details of irradiation. Methods Multivariate logistic regression models were applied for the presence or absence of light flash and odor. Gender, age, radiotherapy method (proton beam therapy vs. photon radiotherapy), dose of retina, optic nerve, chiasmatic gland, pituitary, nasal cavity, oral cavity, frontal lobe, parietal lobe, occipital lobe, temporal lobe, amygdala, and hippocampus were set as candidates of explanatory variables. Results Light flash and odor during radiotherapy have been suggested to be associated with younger age and retina and nasal cavity irradiation. Multivariate analyses including dose-volume histograms indicated that light flash was related to age, chiasmatic gland irradiation, and pituitary dose, and odor was related to age and nasal cavity irradiation. Conclusion Our results indicate that light flash during radiotherapy is caused by irradiation of the visual pathway and that odor is caused by irradiation of the nasal cavity or olfactory bulb.

Synchronization of light flash with the irradiation pulse in proton beam therapy: A case report.

The correlation between sensory light flash and proton beam delivery was evaluated by measuring the timing of pulse beam delivery and light flash sensing using an event recorder in an 83-year-old patient receiving proton beam therapy (PBT) for nasopharyngeal adenoid cystic carcinoma. The treatment dose was 65 Gy (RBE) in 26 fractions with 2 ports, and both beams included the visual pathway (retina, optic nerve, chiasma). Measurements were obtained in 13 of the 26 fractions. The patient sensed a light flash in all 13 fractions and pressed the recorder button for 426 of the 430 pulsed beam deliveries, giving a sensing rate of 99.1%. The median duration of button-pressing of 0.3 s was almost the same as that of the beam pulse of 0.2 s, with a reaction time lag of 0.35 s. These results suggest a consistency between light flash during PBT and the timing of irradiation.

Analysis of person-hours required for proton beam therapy for pediatric tumors.

Proton beam therapy (PBT) is effective for pediatric tumors, but patients may require sedation and other preparations, which extend the treatment time. Pediatric patients were classified into sedation and non-sedation cases. Adult patients were classified into three groups based on irradiation from two directions without or with respiratory synchronization and patch irradiation. Treatment person-hours were calculated as follows: (time from entering to leaving the treatment room) × (number of required personnel). A detailed analysis showed that the person-hours required for the treatment of pediatric patients are about 1.4-3.5 times greater than those required for adult patients. With the inclusion of additional time for the preparation of pediatric patients, PBT for pediatric cases is two to four times more labor-intensive than for typical adult cases.

Light flash and odor during proton beam therapy for pediatric patients: a prospective observational study.

Light flash and odor during radiation therapy are well-known phenomena, but the details are poorly understood, particularly in pediatric patients. Therefore, we conducted a prospective observational study of these events in pediatric patients (age ≤20 years old) who received radiotherapy at our center from January 2019 to November 2021. Light flash and odor were evaluated using a patient-reported checklist including the presence, strength, and duration of the phenomenon, and color of light or type of odor. 53 patients who received proton therapy (n=47) and photon radiotherapy (n=6) were enrolled in this study. The median age of the patients was 10, ranged from 5 to 20. The patients who was able to see the light flash was 4, and all of them received retina irradiation. This was equivalent to 57% of the patients who received radiotherapy to retina (n=7). The light was bright and colored mainly blue and purple, which seemed to be consistent with Cherenkov light. Odor was sensed by 9 (17%) patients, and seven patients of the 9 received nasal cavity irradiation. This was equivalent to 41% of the patients who received nasal cavity irradiation (n=17). Other 2 patients received proton therapy to brain tumor. The odors were mainly described as plastic, burnt and disinfectant, which may be caused by ozone generated during irradiation. These data suggest that pediatric patients with retinal and nasal cavity irradiation frequently sense light flashes or odor. So adequate care is necessary so that these patients are not worried about this phenomenon.

Abnormal sensation during total body irradiation: a prospective observational study.

Light flash and odor during radiotherapy are well-known phenomena. Two prospective observational studies have indicated that 55% of patients observed a light flash during irradiation of the retina and 27% of patients sensed an odor during radiotherapy for the nasal cavity. A prospective observational study was performed in all patients at our hospital who received total body irradiation (TBI) between January 2019 to October 2021. Light flash and odor during TBI were examined using the same method as that used in previous studies. A total of 32 patients received TBI during the study period. The patients had a median age of 41 (18-60) years, and included 20 males and 12 females. A survey checklist showed that 14 patients (44%) sensed light and 14 patients (44%) sensed odor during TBI,. The color of the light during irradiation was yellow in six cases, white in four cases, and blue in four cases. The intensity of the light was 2-5 (median 3, 1 is very weak, 5 is very strong) and the time over which the light flash was felt was 4-60 s (median 10 s). Two patients each sensed smells of plastic, ozone and bleach, and others sensed one smell each. The intensity of the odor was 1-4 (median 3, 1 is very weak, 5 is very strong) and the time over which the odor was sensed was 1-25 s (median 3 s). We conclude that light flashes and odors are each sensed by 44% of patients during TBI. Various types of light flashes and odors were reported in this study.

Olfactory Sensations During Proton and Photon Radiotherapy: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study.

PURPOSE: Patients often report a sense of smell during radiation therapy (RT), but the details of these events are not well understood. The purpose of the study was to evaluate events of smell during photon RT and proton beam therapy (PBT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The subjects were all adult patients (≥20 years old) treated with photon RT or PBT at two centers from January 2019 to August 2020, with the exclusion of those with communication difficulties or olfactory abnormality. The presence of smell, odor type, intensity (five levels), and time period was examined prospectively using a weekly checklist. RESULTS: A total of 649 courses were examined in 620 patients who received photon RT (n=415) or PBT (n=205). A smell during the procedure was sensed by 51 patients (8.2%). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, nasal cavity dose (p=0.002), age (p<0.001), and photon RT (p=0.018) were identified as significant factors associated with a sense of smell. Smell occurred in only 23/515 patients (4.5%) in whom the nasal cavity was not irradiated, but in 4/19 (21.1%) and 24/86 (27.9%) with nasal cavity maximum isodose lines of 10%-50% and 60%-100%, respectively. Patients who received photon RT sensed a smell (43/415; 10.4%) more frequently than those treated with PBT (8/205; 3.9%). Of the 51 patients who sensed a smell, 32 (63%) reported a burnt smell, eight (16%) a chemical smell, two (4%) a sour smell, and nine another smell (copier machine, sweet, garbage, etc.). CONCLUSIONS: The sense of a smell appears to be common during RT and this sensation is significantly associated with the nasal cavity dose, younger age, and photon RT.

Light flashes during proton and photon radiotherapy: A multicenter prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who receive radiation therapy sometimes complain of a light flash during irradiation. The details of the characteristics of this light have not been described. PURPOSE: To evaluate light flashes during photon and proton radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective observational study was performed in all adult patients (≥20 years old) who received photon and proton therapy at two centers between January 2019 and August 2020, except for patients who could not communicate and those with visual abnormality. Evaluations were obtained for the presence or absence of light flashes, light darkness (7 levels), light intensity (5 levels), frequency, light movement, light flashing, and time seeing the light, using a weekly checklist. RESULTS: A total of 650 courses were examined for 621 patients, of whom 416 received photon radiotherapy and 205 received proton beam therapy. The checklist indicated that 88 patients (16.1%) sensed light during photon or proton radiotherapy. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the factors that were significantly associated with a light flash were a higher retina dose and younger age (p < 0.001). Light flashes were seen by only 35/524 patients (6.7%) for whom the retina was not irradiated, but by 13/33 (39.4%) and 41/64 (64.1%) with maximum isodose lines for the retina of 10-50% and 60-100%, respectively. The numbers of patients who sensed blue, purple, yellow, red, white and other colors were 52, 15, 15, 9, 16 and 8, respectively (multiple selections possible). Light movement was observed by 52 patients (59%). The location of the light was defined as near, far, and middle by 70, 13, and 5 patients, respectively. The median time the light was seen was 10 s. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients sense light flashes during radiotherapy. The retina dose and a younger age were significantly associated with the frequency of light flashes.

Preparation of pediatric patients for treatment with proton beam therapy.

PURPOSE: Anesthesia is often used in proton beam therapy (PBT) for pediatric patients and this may prolong the treatment time. The aim of the study was to examine preparation of pediatric patients to allow smooth performance of PBT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Preparation was initiated 1-2days before treatment planning CT and continued for 10days. The patient first visited the facility to become familiar with the treatment room and staff. As the second step, the patient stayed in the treatment bed for a certain time with their mother, and then stayed on the treatment bed alone. Special fixtures painted with characters, music, and gifts were also prepared. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2014, 111 pediatric patients underwent PBT. These patients were divided into 3 groups: 40 who could follow instructions well (group A, median age: 13.6years old), 60 who could communicate, but found it difficult to stay alone for a long time (group B, median age: 4.6years old), and 11 who could not follow instructions (group C, median age: 1.6years old). Preparation was used for patients in group B. The mean treatment times in groups A, B and C were 13.6, 17.1, and 15.6min, respectively, on PBT treatment days 2-6, and 11.8, 13.0, and 16.9min, respectively, for the last 5days of PBT treatment. The time reduction was significant in group B (p=0.003). CONCLUSION: Preparation is useful for pediatric patients who can communicate. This approach allows PBT to be conducted more smoothly over a shorter treatment time.

Genetic polymorphisms in dopamine- and serotonin-related genes and treatment responses to risperidone and perospirone.

We investigated the possible association between genetic polymorphisms in the dopamine receptor and serotonin transporter genes and the responses of schizophrenic patients treated with either risperidone or perospirone. The subjects comprised 27 patients with schizophrenia who were clinically evaluated both before and after treatment. The genotyping of the polymorphisms of the dopamine D2 receptor gene (DRD2) (rs1801028 and rs6277), the dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4) (120-bp tandem repeats and rs1800955), and serotonin transporter gene (5HTT)(variable number of tandem repeats; VNTR) were performed using the real-time polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. In DRD2 and 5HTT-VNTR, there were no significant correlations between clinical response and polymorphism in the case of risperidone, and for perospirone treatment it was impossible to analyze the clinical evaluation due to the absence of genotype information. On the other hand, in DRD4 there were significant correlations in the two-factor interaction effect on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) between the two drugs [120-bp tandem repeat, p=0.003; rs1800955, p=0.043]. Although the small sample represents a serious limitation, these results suggest that variants in DRD4 are a predictor of whether treatment will be more effective with risperidone or with perospirone in individual patients.