Long-term Musculoskeletal and Marrow Sparing with Proton FLASH in Juvenile Mice: Implications for Pediatric Osteosarcoma
Hu, Z.; Titt, U.; Li, Y.; Konradsson, E. K.; Aguilar, E. A.; Neill, D. W.; Connell, L.; Wang, X.; Meyer, H. J.; Gagea, M. L.; McGovern, S. L.; Schueler, E.; Mohan, R.
Show abstract
PurposeOsteosarcoma is the most common primary bone malignancy in children and adolescents. Radiotherapy is limited by intrinsic radioresistance and the risk of severe long-term musculoskeletal toxicities. FLASH radiotherapy, delivered at ultra-high dose rates (>40 Gy/s), has demonstrated normal tissue sparing in preclinical models, but its effects on the developing skeleton and marrow remain poorly defined. This study evaluated the chronic normal tissue effects of proton FLASH in juvenile mice, modeling the pediatric context. Methods and MaterialsJuvenile C57BL/6 mice (3-4 weeks old) were randomized to receive 11 Gy FLASH ({approx}200 Gy/s) or conventional proton irradiation (0.2 Gy/s average), or sham treatment to the left hind leg using a synchrotron-based proton beamline. Mice were followed for 10 weeks post-treatment. Bone toxicity was assessed with microCT (bone mineral density, bone volume fractions, trabecular indices) and histology. Bone marrow cellularity was quantified on H&E-stained sections, and muscle fibrosis was assessed using Massons trichrome. ResultsFLASH-treated mice exhibited significant preservation of bone microarchitecture compared with conventional treated mice, with higher bone mineral density and bone volume fractions (p < 0.05). Trabecular numbers were maintained, while structure model index indicates a mechanically favorable trabecular structures in the FLASH group. Bone marrow cellularity was preserved in FLASH mice (5.3% reduction vs. sham) compared with conventional (11.3 % reduction, p < 0.05). Muscle fibrosis was significantly lower in FLASH group (fibrosis positivity 2.6 % vs. 3.0% for FLASH vs. conventional CONV, p < 0.05). No severe immobility or weight loss was observed across groups. ConclusionsProton FLASH significantly reduces long-term bone, marrow, and muscle toxicities in juvenile mice. These findings provide the first demonstration of musculoskeletal sparing in a synchrotron proton FLASH platform and highlight its translational potential for pediatric osteosarcoma.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Redefining FLASH RT: the impact of mean dose rate and dose per pulse in the gastrointestinal tract 98%
- Discordance in acute gastrointestinal toxicity between synchrotron-based proton and linac-based electron ultra-high dose rate irradiation 97%
- FLASH Bragg-peak irradiation with a therapeutic carbon ion beam: first in vivo results 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Dosimetric and biologic intercomparison between electron and proton FLASH beams 97%
- A multi-institutional study to investigate the sparing effect after whole brain electron FLASH in mice: Reproducibility and temporal evolution of functional, electrophysiological, and neurogenic endpoints 96%
- Serum miRNA-based signature indicates radiation exposure and dose in humans: a multicenter diagnostic biomarker study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Analyses of cancer incidence and other morbidities in gamma irradiated B6CF1 mice 96%
- Analyses of cancer incidence and other morbidities in neutron irradiated B6CF1 mice 95%
- Predictive factors for the development of peritumoral brain edema after LINAC-based radiation treatment in patients with intracranial meningioma 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-Invasive monitoring of normal tissue radiation damage using quantitative ultrasound spectroscopy 97%
- Cell lines of the same anatomic site and histologic type show large variability in intrinsic radiosensitivity and relative biological effectiveness to protons and carbon ions 96%
- Experimental investigation of oxygen diffusion in the peak and valley region of minibeam patterns during X-Ray irradiation 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.