Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T16:27:14.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Is the proton–boron fusion therapy effective?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2020

Navid Khaledi*
Affiliation:
Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai200433, China Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-Beam Application (MOE), Fudan University, Shanghai200433, China
Xufei Wang
Affiliation:
Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai200433, China Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-Beam Application (MOE), Fudan University, Shanghai200433, China
Roghiye B. Hosseinabadi
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Health, Khoy University of Medical Science, Khoy, Iran
Farhad Samiei
Affiliation:
Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
*
Author for correspondence: Navid Khaledi, Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai200433, China. Tel: +86-13162274707. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Introduction:

In the recent years, some publications (mainly from one group of authors) have dealt with the effectiveness of proton–boron fusion therapy (PBFT). This theory is based on the Q-value of three produced α particles in the reaction of protons with boron (11B). They claim that this reaction significantly increases the absorbed dose in the target volume. However, the current study would re-evaluate their method to show if PBFT is really effective.

Methods and materials:

A parallel 80-MeV proton beam was irradiated on a water medium in a cubic boron uptake region (BUR). The two-dimensional dose distribution and percentage depth dose of protons, alphas and all particles were calculated using tally F6 and mesh-tallies by Monte Carlo N Particle Transport code.

Results:

The results not only showed that the dose enhancement in BUR is neglectable but also the higher density of BUR in comparison with water led to decrement of dose in this region. Because of low cross section of boron for proton beam (<100 mb), the α particles’ dose is 1,000 times lower than the proton dose.

Conclusions:

The physical aspects and the simulation results did not show any effectiveness of the PBFT for proton therapy dose enhancement.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Yoon, D-K, Jung, J-Y, Suh, TS. Application of proton boron fusion reaction to radiation therapy: a Monte Carlo simulation study. Appl Phys Lett 2014; 105 (22): 223507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendricks, JS, McKinney, GW, Fensin, ML et al. MCNPX 2.6. 0 Extensions. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), 2008.Google Scholar
Jung, J-Y, Yoon, D-K, Lee, HC et al. The investigation of physical conditions of boron uptake region in proton boron fusion therapy (PBFT). AIP Adv 2016; 6 (9): 095119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, S, Yoon, D-K, Shin, H-B et al. A simulation study for radiation treatment planning based on the atomic physics of the proton-boron fusion reaction. J Korean Phys Soc 2017; 70 (6): 629639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung, J-Y, Yoon, D-K, Barraclough, B et al. Comparison between proton boron fusion therapy (PBFT) and boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT): a Monte Carlo study. Oncotarget 2017; 8 (24): 3977439781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shin, H-B, Kim, M-S, Kim, S et al. Quantitative analysis of prompt gamma ray imaging during proton boron fusion therapy according to boron concentration. Oncotarget 2018; 9 (3): 30893096.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cirrone, G, Manti, L, Margarone, D et al. First experimental proof of Proton Boron Capture Therapy (PBCT) to enhance protontherapy effectiveness. Sci Rep 2018; 8 (1): 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazzone, A, Finocchiaro, P, Meo, SL et al. On the (Un) Effectiveness of Proton Boron Capture in Proton Therapy. arXiv preprint arXiv:180209482; 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collaboration, G, Agostinelli, S. GEANT4 – a simulation toolkit. Nucl Instrum Meth A 2003; 506 (25): 250303.Google Scholar
Pelowitz, D. MCNPX User’s Manual Version 2.6. Report LA-CP-07-1473. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), 2008.Google Scholar
Chadwick, M. LA150 documentation of cross sections, heating, and damage. LA-UR-99-1222; 1999.Google Scholar
Chadwick, M, Herman, M, Obložinský, P et al. ENDF/B-VII. 1 nuclear data for science and technology: cross sections, covariances, fission product yields and decay data. Nucl Data Sheets 2011; 112 (12): 28872996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soppera, N, Dupont, E, Bossant, M. JANIS Book of Proton-induced Cross Sections: Comparison of Evaluated and Experimental Data from ENDF/B-VII. 1. OECD NEA Data Bank: JENDL/HE-2007, PADF-2007, TENDL-2011 and EXFOR, 2012.Google Scholar
Rochman, D, Koning, A. TENDL-2011: TALYS-based Evaluated Nuclear Data Library. American Nuclear Society – ANS: USA, 2012.Google Scholar
Alrumayan, F, Okarvi, S, Nagatsu, K et al. Development of a nickel plated aluminum krypton-81m target system. Appl Radiat Isotopes 2017; 121: 611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, T, Esposito, M, Poludniowski, G et al. Expected proton signal sizes in the PRaVDA Range Telescope for proton Computed Tomography. J Instrum 2015; 10 (05): P05013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanagië, H, Ogata, A, Sugiyama, H et al. Application of drug delivery system to boron neutron capture therapy for cancer. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2008; 5 (4): 427443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kueffer, PJ, Maitz, CA, Khan, AA et al. Boron neutron capture therapy demonstrated in mice bearing EMT6 tumors following selective delivery of boron by rationally designed liposomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2013; 110: 65126517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ozawa, T, Santos, RA, Lamborn, KR et al. In vivo evaluation of the boronated porphyrin TABP-1 in U-87 MG intracerebral human glioblastoma xenografts. Mol Pharm 2004; 1 (5): 368374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed