Proton FLASH preserves neurocognition across delivery techniques: implications for clinical translation in pediatric brain tumors.

BACKGROUND

Radiation therapy is integral to the curative treatment of childhood brain tumors but contributes to late neurocognitive impairment in survivors. FLASH (ultra-high dose rate, >40Gy/s) reduces normal-tissue toxicity in preclinical models, and proton-FLASH is currently the only modality capable of delivering ultra-high dose rates to the deep targets, such as pediatric brain tumors. However, two questions remain unresolved before clinical translation: (1) whether the FLASH effect can be achieved on synchrotron-based proton systems, which deliver protons in discrete spills that may be insufficient to cover a clinical target within a single delivery, and (2) which dose-rate metric, among the multiple definitions currently used in the field, best predicts the biological FLASH effect.

METHODS

C57BL/6 mice (7-8 weeks) received 10 Gy whole-brain RT via a clinical Hitachi ProBEAT synchrotron with CBCT-guided delivery, using three transmission-beam techniques: single-spill pencil beam scanning (SS PBS), multi-spill PBS with ∼2-second inter-spot delay (MS PBS), and passive scatter (PS), compared to conventional (CONV) delivery and unirradiated controls (n=24-28/group, equal sex distribution). Dose rate was quantified using three frameworks: field dose rate (FDR), PBS dose rate (PBSDR), and dose-averaged dose rate (DADR). Recognition memory was assessed by novel object recognition (NOR) at 6 weeks post-RT, and cognitive flexibility was assessed via touchscreen visual discrimination and reversal learning at 14 weeks. Hippocampal neuroinflammation was evaluated by immunofluorescence and immunohistochemistry for Iba1, NeuN, and GFAP.

RESULTS

FLASH conditions were met by SS PBS and PS under all three dose-rate definitions, but MS PBS qualified as FLASH only by DADR. Despite this, neuroprotection was preserved across all three FLASH techniques: discrimination index was significantly higher for SS PBS (P=0.021), MS PBS (P=0.008), and PS (P<0.001) versus CONV, with no significant difference between FLASH techniques. On touchscreen testing, FLASH-treated females demonstrated preserved cognitive flexibility (P=0.047 vs. CONV on reversal learning correct trials). Iba1 + microglia were reduced in FLASH compared to CONV mice, with morphology suggestive of preserved homeostatic state.

CONCLUSIONS

Synchrotron-based proton FLASH preserves neurocognitive function across all delivery techniques, including under multi-spill delivery essential for treating clinical-scale pediatric brain tumors. Critically, this neuroprotection was observed even for deliveries that qualified as FLASH only by DADR, identifying DADR as the dose-rate metric most relevant to the biological FLASH effect with direct implications for clinical trial design and dose-rate reporting standards.