Browsing by Author "Bush, Karl"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Abdominal FLASH irradiation reduces radiation-induced gastrointestinal toxicity for the treatment of ovarian cancer in mice
    (Springer Nature, 2020-12-10) Levy, Karen; Natarajan, Suchitra; Wang, Jinghui; Chow, Stephanie; Eggold, Joshua T.; Loo, Phoebe E.; Manjappa, Rakesh; Melemenidis, Stavros; Lartey, Frederick M.; Schüler, Emil; Skinner, Lawrie; Rafat, Marjan; Ko, Ryan; Kim, Anna; Al-Rawi, Duaa H.; von Eyben, Rie; Dorigo, Oliver; Casey, Kerriann M.; Graves, Edward E.; Bush, Karl; Yu, Amy S.; Koong, Albert C.; Maxim, Peter G.; Loo, Billy W., Jr.; Rankin, Erinn B.; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    Radiation therapy is the most effective cytotoxic therapy for localized tumors. However, normal tissue toxicity limits the radiation dose and the curative potential of radiation therapy when treating larger target volumes. In particular, the highly radiosensitive intestine limits the use of radiation for patients with intra-abdominal tumors. In metastatic ovarian cancer, total abdominal irradiation (TAI) was used as an effective postsurgical adjuvant therapy in the management of abdominal metastases. However, TAI fell out of favor due to high toxicity of the intestine. Here we utilized an innovative preclinical irradiation platform to compare the safety and efficacy of TAI ultra-high dose rate FLASH irradiation to conventional dose rate (CONV) irradiation in mice. We demonstrate that single high dose TAI-FLASH produced less mortality from gastrointestinal syndrome, spared gut function and epithelial integrity, and spared cell death in crypt base columnar cells compared to TAI-CONV irradiation. Importantly, TAI-FLASH and TAI-CONV irradiation had similar efficacy in reducing tumor burden while improving intestinal function in a preclinical model of ovarian cancer metastasis. These findings suggest that FLASH irradiation may be an effective strategy to enhance the therapeutic index of abdominal radiotherapy, with potential application to metastatic ovarian cancer.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    FLASH Irradiation Results in Reduced Severe Skin Toxicity Compared to Conventional-Dose-Rate Irradiation
    (BioOne, 2020-12-01) Soto, Luis A.; Casey, Kerriann M.; Wang, Jinghui; Blaney, Alexandra; Manjappa, Rakesh; Breitkreutz, Dylan; Skinner, Lawrie; Dutt, Suparna; Ko, Ryan B.; Bush, Karl; Yu, Amy S.; Melemenidis, Stavros; Strober, Samuel; Englemann, Edgar; Maxim, Peter G.; Graves, Edward E.; Loo, Billy W., Jr.; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    Radiation therapy, along with surgery and chemotherapy, is one of the main treatments for cancer. While radiotherapy is highly effective in the treatment of localized tumors, its main limitation is its toxicity to normal tissue. Previous preclinical studies have reported that ultra-high dose-rate (FLASH) irradiation results in reduced toxicity to normal tissues while controlling tumor growth to a similar extent relative to conventional-dose-rate (CONV) irradiation. To our knowledge this is the first report of a dose-response study in mice comparing the effect of FLASH irradiation vs. CONV irradiation on skin toxicity. We found that FLASH irradiation results in both a lower incidence and lower severity of skin ulceration than CONV irradiation 8 weeks after single-fraction hemithoracic irradiation at high doses (30 and 40 Gy). Survival was also higher after FLASH hemithoracic irradiation (median survival >180 days at doses of 30 and 40 Gy) compared to CONV irradiation (median survival 100 and 52 days at 30 and 40 Gy, respectively). No ulceration was observed at doses 20 Gy or below in either FLASH or CONV. These results suggest a shifting of the dose-response curve for radiation-induced skin ulceration to the right for FLASH, compared to CONV irradiation, suggesting the potential for an enhanced therapeutic index for radiation therapy of cancer.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Impact of Audiovisual-Assisted Therapeutic Ambience in Radiation Therapy (AVATAR) on Anesthesia Use, Payer Charges, and Treatment Time in Pediatric Patients
    (Elsevier, 2020) Balazy, Katy E.; Gutkin, Paulina M.; Skinner, Lawrie; von Eyben, Rie; Fowler, Tyler; Pinkham, Daniel W.; Rodriguez, Samuel; Maxim, Peter G.; Donaldson, Sarah S.; Loo, Billy W., Jr.; Bush, Karl; Hiniker, Susan M.; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    Purpose Pediatric radiation therapy (RT) requires optimal immobilization that often necessitates daily anesthesia. To decrease anesthesia use, we implemented a novel audiovisual-assisted therapeutic ambience in RT (AVATAR) system that projects video onto a radiolucent screen within the child’s line of vision to provide attentional diversion. We investigated its reduction on anesthesia use, payer charges, and treatment time, in addition to its impact on radiation delivery. Methods and Materials A 6-year retrospective analysis was performed among children undergoing RT (n = 224) 3 years before and 3 years after the introduction of AVATAR. The frequency of anesthesia use before and after AVATAR implementation, in addition to RT treatment times, were compared. The number of spared anesthesia treatments allowed for a charge to payer analysis. To document the lack of surface dose perturbation by AVATAR, a phantom craniospinal treatment course was delivered both with and without AVATAR. Additionally, an ion chamber course was delivered to document changes to the dose at depth. Results More children were able to avoid anesthesia use entirely in the post-AVATAR cohort compared with the pre-AVATAR cohort (73.2% vs 63.4%; P = .03), and fewer required anesthesia for each treatment (18.8% vs 33%; P = .03). AVATAR introduction reduced anesthesia use for all ages studied. Treatment time per session was reduced by 38% using AVATAR compared with anesthesia. There were 326 fewer anesthesia sessions delivered over 3 years after AVATAR was introduced, with an estimated savings of >$500,000. Optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters revealed a small increase in dose of 0.8% to 9.5% with AVATAR, whereas the use of a thermomolded face mask increased skin dose by as much as 58%. Conclusions AVATAR introduction decreased anesthesia use in children undergoing RT. More children avoided anesthesia entirely, and fewer needed anesthesia for every treatment, resulting in a reduction in treatment time and savings of nearly $550,000 in approximately 3 years, with minimal perturbation of RT dose delivery.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Integrating Audiovisual Immersion Into Pediatric Radiation Therapy Across Multiple Centers: Methodology, Timeliness, and Cost of the Audiovisual-Assisted Therapeutic Ambience in Radiation Therapy Prospective Multi-Institutional Trial
    (Elsevier, 2024-08-10) Oh, Justin; Skinner, Lawrie; Gutkin, Paulina M.; Jiang, Alice; Donaldson, Sarah S.; Loo, Billy W., Jr.; Wang, Yi Peng; Ewongwo, Agnes; Bredfeldt, Jeremy S.; Breneman, John C.; Constine, Louis S.; Faught, Austin M.; Haas-Kogan, Daphne; Holmes, Jordan A.; Krasin, Matthew; Larkin, Charlene; Marcus, Karen J.; Maxim, Peter G.; McClelland, Shearwood, III; Murphy, Blair; Palmer, Joshua D.; Perkins, Stephanie M.; Shen, Colette J.; Terezakis, Stephanie; Bush, Karl; Hiniker, Susan M.; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    Purpose: The Audiovisual-Assisted Therapeutic Ambience in Radiotherapy (AVATAR) trial was a prospective multicenter study (NCT03991156) examining the combination of video immersion with radiation therapy and was successfully conducted through the collaboration of pediatric radiation oncology teams at 10 institutions independent of any pre-existing consortium. We sought to analyze and report the methodology of trial conception and development, process map, and cost. Methods and materials: The study enrolled patients aged 3 to 10 years preparing to undergo radiation therapy, integrated the combination of AVATAR-based video immersion with radiation therapy at each institution, and offered AVATAR use as an alternative to anesthesia, with rates of anesthesia use and outcomes of serial standardized anxiety and quality-of-life assessments assessed among the 81 children enrolled. A process map was created based on the trial timeline with the following components: study development time (time from conception of the trial to the accrual of the first patient, including design phase, agreement and approval phase, and site preparation phase), and accrual duration time (time from the first to last accrual). Costs and institutional success rates were calculated. Results: Time from inception of study to last accrual was 3.6 years (1313 days). The study development time was 417 days (31.7%), and accrual duration time was 896 days (68.3%), with the final 50% of accrual occurring in <6 months. Equipment cost was approximately $550 per institution and was covered by funding from the lead study institution. All 10 centers were successful with AVATAR implementation, defined as ≥50% of patients able to avoid anesthesia with the use of AVATAR, including centers with both photon and proton therapy. Conclusions: This report elaborates on the methodology and timeline of trial conception and development using data from a previously published supportive care study combining video immersion with radiation therapy among 10 cooperating pediatric oncology institutions. It highlights the potential for multicenter collaborations on prospective trials integrating supportive care therapies with radiation therapy.