The results suggest that the model is accurate, fast and can be used for a wide range of treatment modalities to calculate the whole-body dose distribution for clinical analysis. For similar energy spectra, the mechanistic patient scatter model can be used independently of treatment machine or beam orientation.

Proton therapy has shown dosimetric advantages over conventional radiation therapy using photons. Although the integral dose for patients treated with proton therapy is low, concerns were raised about late effects like secondary cancer caused by dose depositions far away from the treated area. This is especially true for neutrons and therefore the stray dose contribution from neutrons in proton therapy is still being investigated. The higher biological effectiveness of neutrons compared to photons is the main cause of these concerns. The gold-standard in neutron dosimetry is measurements, but performing neutron measurements is challenging. Different approaches have been taken to overcome these difficulties, for instance with newly developed neutron detectors. Monte Carlo simulations is another common technique to assess the dose from secondary neutrons. Measurements and simulations are used to develop analytical models for fast neutron dose estimations. This article tries to summarize the developments in the different aspects of neutron dose in proton therapy since 2017. In general, low neutron doses have been reported, especially in active proton therapy. Although the published biological effectiveness of neutrons relative to photons regarding cancer induction is higher, it is unlikely that the neutron dose has a large impact on the second cancer risk of proton therapy patients.

In radiation therapy, high energy photon and proton beams cause the production of secondary neutrons. This leads to an unwanted dose contribution, which can be considerable for tissues outside of the target volume regarding the long term health of cancer patients. Due to the high biological effectiveness of neutrons in regards to cancer induction, small neutron doses can be important. This study quantified the neutron doses for different radiation therapy modalities. Most of the reports in the literature used neutron dose measurements free in air or on the surface of phantoms to estimate the amount of neutron dose to the patient. In this study, dose measurements were performed in terms of neutron dose equivalent inside an anthropomorphic phantom. The neutron dose equivalent was determined using track etch detectors as a function of the distance to the isocenter, as well as for radiation sensitive organs. The dose distributions were compared with respect to treatment techniques (3D-conformal, volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for photons; spot scanning and passive scattering for protons), therapy machines (Varian, Elekta and Siemens linear accelerators) and radiation quality (photons and protons). The neutron dose equivalent varied between 0.002 and 3 mSv per treatment gray over all measurements. Only small differences were found when comparing treatment techniques, but substantial differences were observed between the linear accelerator models. The neutron dose equivalent for proton therapy was higher than for photons in general and in particular for double-scattered protons. The overall neutron dose equivalent measured in this study was an order of magnitude lower than the stray dose of a treatment using 6 MV photons, suggesting that the contribution of the secondary neutron dose equivalent to the integral dose of a radiotherapy patient is small.

This study showed that the dose outside of the treated volume is influenced by several sources. Therefore, when comparing different treatment techniques, the dose ratios vary with distance to the isocenter. The effective dose outside the treated volume of intensity-modulated treatments with or without flattening filter was 10%-30% larger when compared to 3D-conformal radiotherapy. This dose increase is much lower than the monitor unit scaled effective dose from a static treatment.

In proton therapy, high-energy proton beams cause the production of secondary neutrons. This leads to an unwanted dose contribution, which can be considerable for tissues outside of the target volume regarding the long-term health of cancer patients. Due to the high biological effectiveness of neutrons with regard to cancer induction, small neutron doses can be important. Published comparisons of neutron dose measurements and the corresponding estimates of cancer risk between different treatment modalities differ over orders of magnitude. In this report, the controversy about the impact of the neutron dose in proton therapy is critically discussed and viewed in the light of new epidemiological studies. In summary, the impact of neutron dose on cancer risk can be determined correctly only if the dose distributions are carefully measured or computed. It is important to include not only the neutron component into comparisons but also the complete deposition of energy as precisely as possible. Cancer risk comparisons between different radiation qualities, treatment machines, and techniques have to be performed under similar conditions. It seems that in the past, the uncertainty in the models which lead from dose to risk were overestimated when compared with erroneous dose comparisons. Current risk models used with carefully obtained dose distributions predict a second cancer risk reduction for active protons vs. photons and a more or less constant risk of passive protons vs. photons. Those findings are in general agreement with newly obtained epidemiologically results.

Daily setup imaging using kilovoltage planar images or TomoTherapy megavoltage fan beam CT imaging can be used as a standard procedure in clinical routine. Daily kilovoltage and megavoltage cone beam computed tomography setup imaging should be applied on an individual or indication based protocol. Depending on the imaging scheme applied, image-guided radiation therapy can be administered without increasing the dose outside of the treated volume compared to therapies without image guidance.

No abstract

Hyperthermia (HT) is a cancer treatment modality which targets malignant tissues by heating to 40–43 °C. In addition to its direct antitumor effects, HT potently sensitizes the tumor to radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT), thereby enabling complete eradication of some tumor entities as shown in randomized clinical trials. Despite the proven efficacy of HT in combination with classic cancer treatments, there are limited international standards for the delivery of HT in the clinical setting. Consequently, there is a large variability in reported data on thermometric parameters, including the temperature obtained from multiple reference points, heating duration, thermal dose, time interval, and sequence between HT and other treatment modalities. Evidence from some clinical trials indicates that thermal dose, which correlates with heating time and temperature achieved, could be used as a predictive marker for treatment efficacy in future studies. Similarly, other thermometric parameters when chosen optimally are associated with increased antitumor efficacy. This review summarizes the existing clinical evidence for the prognostic and predictive role of the most important thermometric parameters to guide the combined treatment of RT and CT with HT. In conclusion, we call for the standardization of thermometric parameters and stress the importance for their validation in future prospective clinical studies