Boron neutron capture therapy of cancer: where do we stand now?

IF 20.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Cancer Communications Pub Date : 2024-07-08 DOI:10.1002/cac2.12581
Rolf F. Barth, Gong Wu, Maria da Graca H. Vicente, John C Grecula, Nilendu Gupta
{"title":"Boron neutron capture therapy of cancer: where do we stand now?","authors":"Rolf F. Barth,&nbsp;Gong Wu,&nbsp;Maria da Graca H. Vicente,&nbsp;John C Grecula,&nbsp;Nilendu Gupta","doi":"10.1002/cac2.12581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the <i>third</i> Editorial/Commentary that one of us (R. F. Barth) has written relating to boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) [<span>1, 2</span>]. For those readers who are unfamiliar with BNCT we would refer them to several recent comprehensive reviews [<span>3-5</span>]. The <i>second</i> Editorial ended on a hopeful note that with the introduction of accelerator-based neutron sources (ABNSs), BNCT would enter into the mainstream of radiation therapy [<span>2</span>]. This indeed has happened most notably in Japan, where BNCT now is being used to treat patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region, high-grade gliomas, meningiomas and melanomas. Similarly, there has been great interest in China, as indicated by an impressive number of publications coming from both of them [<span>4, 6, 7</span>]. In contrast to the active programs in Asia, there has been no recent clinical activity relating to BNCT in the United States and Europe. Hopefully, however, after many delays, a clinical program will be initiated in the near future in Finland using an ABNS to treat patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region. The obvious question is why there hasn't been interest in BNCT by clinicians in the United States and Europe? In this Editorial, we will address this question and hopefully make a convincing case for the further development of BNCT as a cancer treatment modality.</p><p>Why has it been so difficult to develop new boron delivery agents for BNCT? Very simply put, the requirements for such agents are very challenging [<span>3, 5</span>]. These include (1) delivery of ∼20-30 µg <sup>10</sup>B/g tumor; (2) high (&gt;1) tumor:normal tissue and tumor:blood boron concentration ratios during irradiation; and (3) rapid clearance of boron from normal tissues while persisting in the tumor during neutron irradiation. The intracellular localization of <sup>10</sup>B in tumor cells is also important, and ideally, the closer to the nucleus, the better. To date, only two boron delivery agents have met many but not all of these requirements: a boron-containing derivative of phenylalanine, known as boronophenylalanine (BPA), and a polyhedral borane, known as sodium borocaptate (BSH). Finally, a major challenge in the development of effective boron delivery agents is their localization in all parts of the tumor and within all tumor cells. As reported by Elowitz et al. [<span>8</span>] and Goodman et al. [<span>9</span>], there was considerable variability in the boron concentrations of both BPA [<span>8</span>] and BSH [<span>9</span>] in multiple tissue samples taken from the same tumor. This would be especially true in brain tumors, since the blood-brain barrier limits trans-vascular entry of high-molecular weight boron delivery agents (&gt;100 Da) into the tumor.</p><p>Many classes of boron-containing delivery agents have been proposed, and these broadly can be divided into low-molecular weight agents, such as amino acids, peptides, polyamines, nucleosides, carbohydrates, and porphyrins, and high-molecular weight agents, such as liposomes, proteins, monoclonal antibodies, and nanoparticles [<span>5, 10</span>]. Between 2018 and 2023, many new boron delivery agents with different chemical characteristics have been reported in both the chemical [<span>5</span>] and biological literature [<span>10</span>]. Based on studies in mice, we believe that the most promising of these is the 3-isomer of BPA (3-BPA), which has 10-100 times greater solubility than that of the 4-isomer of BPA (4-BPA) which currently is being used clinically [<span>3</span>]. The tumor uptake of 3-BPA in B16F10 melanoma-bearing mice was equal to that of 4-BPA [<span>11</span>], which requires complexing with fructose or sucrose to increase its solubility. A second promising chemical modification of BPA has been described by Nomoto et al. [<span>12</span>], who have reported that poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) can form complexes with BPA, thereby producing reversible boronated esters. In vitro studies revealed that PVA-BPA attained 3.6 times higher intracellular boron concentrations than the fructose-BPA complex. In vivo studies were carried out with murine CT26 colon cancer cells, implanted subcutaneously into mice, followed by intravenous administration of PVA-BPA and neutron irradiation. This resulted in a highly significant reduction in tumor volume over a 60-day period compared to unirradiated controls [<span>12</span>]. The uptake and retention of high-molecular weight delivery agents [<span>4, 5, 10</span>], such as monoclonal antibodies, albumin, anti-angiogenic peptides, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeting liposomes, and boron carrier exosomes modified with cell-penetrating peptides, recently have been evaluated, and further studies are warranted. However, none of these have, as yet, reached the stage of clinical evaluation.</p><p>When reviewing the current status of treatment delivery options of neutrons and comparing them with competing radiotherapeutic modalities, great progress has been made with BNCT over the past five years. It is well on the way to becoming a mainstream treatment modality in Japan and China. Over the past few decades, design improvements in both reactor and accelerator neutron beams have made considerable progress. Up until 2015, clinical BNCT was totally dependent upon nuclear reactors as neutron sources, which, to say the least, were not patient-friendly environments. The first major advance was the introduction of epithermal neutron beams in the 1960s, which led to the treatment of more deeply located tumors. The Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in Japan in 2011 resulted in the shutdown of all Japanese nuclear reactors except for the one at the Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute (KURRI) in Kumatori, Japan. Subsequently, in 2015, the nuclear catastrophe led to the introduction of ABNSs, which could be sited in hospitals. Over the past decade, ABNSs have become the mainstay of clinical BNCT in Japan, with at least four of them located in hospital settings [<span>13</span>]. Their clinical use has led to several commercial efforts to provide “turnkey” systems for hospital-based ABNS systems in Japan [<span>13</span>], soon in Finland [<span>14</span>], and several others at different stages of development, such as the Neuboron system being developed in China (https://en.neuboron.com/bnct). This has been the single most important development for the acceptance of BNCT as a cancer treatment modality. However, this transition has not been so easy, as exemplified by the experience of Neutron Therapeutics Inc. in Finland. It has taken over 5 years from the installation of the ABNS in 2018 to the initiation of a clinical trial to treat patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region in the summer of 2024. In many countries, even the installation of ABNSs as investigational use devices would require that they meet stringent safety requirements and control systems, which will be the only way that BNCT could move forward.</p><p>The earliest BNCT treatment planning systems (TPSs) were developed by research groups at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [<span>15</span>], the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, and the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute [<span>13</span>]. All these TPSs' were developed for reactor neutron sources. More recently, TPSs have been developed for ABNSs, and this could be an important step for the further advancement of BNCT as a cancer treatment modality. TPSs for BNCT have followed a similar trajectory as TPSs for conventional radiotherapy. For BNCT to be used in clinical trials, in the future TPSs will be required to comply with local regulations that are in effect. Along with commercially available ABNSs, TPSs' that are commercially developed and maintained [<span>14</span>] will be key to the next phase, in order for BNCT to gaining wider acceptance. Such systems must have planning tools that comply with data exchange standards developed in conventional radiotherapy for supporting clinical trials.</p><p>Significant technological advances have been made in radiotherapy delivery systems over the past few decades and these advances have provided a vast array of very precise treatment delivery options to radiation oncologists for both X-ray and charged particle-based therapies. The other key functionality that has developed over the past decade has been integrated image guidance systems and robotic treatment couches. These allow for very precise re-positioning of patients, thereby ensuring that the treatment target is accurately localized and monitored during treatment delivery. ABNSs that will be used for BNCT must integrate image guidance and robotic positioning systems in order to gain acceptance by the radiotherapy community. Furthermore, especially with commercially developed ABNSs, it is important to incorporate the features mentioned above, as well as advanced collimators, in order to optimize neutron beam delivery.</p><p>Looking back over the past six years, there has been significant progress in several areas: first and foremost, the widespread clinical use of ABNSs in Japan with at least four BNCT treatment centers currently in operation and several others either under construction or planned; second, the introduction of standardized treatment plans for patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region [<span>16</span>], the cost of which now is partially reimbursed by the Japanese National Health Care Agency; third, impressive clinical results that have been obtained in Japan for the treatment of patients with high-grade meningiomas [<span>17</span>], cutaneous [<span>18</span>], and extra-cutaneous melanomas and extra-mammary Paget's disease [<span>19</span>].</p><p>To answer the question posed at the beginning of this Editorial, “Why hasn't there been interest in BNCT by clinicians in the United States and Europe”, there are a number of significant challenges counterbalancing the gains that have been made. <i>First</i>, at this time, there are only two boron delivery agents in clinical use, BPA and, to a much lesser extent, BSH [<span>3</span>]. The best chances to move forward at this time would be to focus on chemical modifications of BPA [<span>11, 12</span>] and BSH, which could make them more effective boron delivery agents. Equally as important is to develop more effective methods for their delivery, especially in the Japanese clinical trial for patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region (JNH0002) [<span>16</span>] and for patients with recurrent high-grade meningiomas. <i>Second</i>, is to further define other types of malignancies that might make BNCT their preferred treatment. Among these are genital malignancies such as recurrent and refractory high-grade meningiomas [<span>17</span>], difficult-to-treat cutaneous melanomas [<span>18</span>], and extramammary Paget's disease and melanomas of the vulva [<span>19</span>]. <i>Third</i>, it must be recognized that there are a limited number of nuclear reactors that can be used to conduct radiation studies in experimental animals. Only the Japanese nuclear reactor at KURRI is being used for animal irradiations, which must be scheduled almost one year in advance since the reactor also is being used for non-biologic studies. In the United States, to the best of our knowledge, at the present time, there are only two nuclear reactors that can be used for animal irradiations, and these are the University of Missouri Research Reactor (Columbia, MO) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor (Boston, MA). In contrast, in China, there are at least four neutron sources that could be used for this purpose and at least two of them that could be used for the irradiation of large animals. Among these is the In-Hospital Neutron Irradiator-1 in Beijing, which has been used for both human and animal irradiations. This, together with the robust basic research programs in Japan and China, bode well for the future of BNCT. One of the significant advantages that we had in the United States, which sadly no longer exists, was the availability of the Brookhaven Medical Research Reactor that was decommissioned over 20 years ago. <i>Fourth</i>, there has been almost a complete lack of funding for BNCT-related research by the National Institutes of Health in the United States, while in contrast, there is significant funding for BNCT in several other countries. From all the above, it should be apparent that BNCT as a cancer treatment modality has had a number of successes but also is facing significant challenges. However, ending on an optimistic note, this is about to change with the possible siting of an ABNS [<span>20</span>] by TAE Life Sciences in the United States.</p><p>Gong Wu participated in the writing of the first draft of this Editorial. Maria da Graca H. Vicente participated in the writing of text related to Requirements for boron delivery agents for BNCT. John Grecula and Nilendu Gupta contributed to the text relating to the Neutron sources, treatment delivery and planning for BNCT. Rolf F. Barth wrote the text in the Introduction, Requirements for boron delivery agents and Conclusions.</p><p>None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to disclose.</p><p>Not applicable.</p><p>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9495,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Communications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":20.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cac2.12581","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Communications","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cac2.12581","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This is the third Editorial/Commentary that one of us (R. F. Barth) has written relating to boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) [1, 2]. For those readers who are unfamiliar with BNCT we would refer them to several recent comprehensive reviews [3-5]. The second Editorial ended on a hopeful note that with the introduction of accelerator-based neutron sources (ABNSs), BNCT would enter into the mainstream of radiation therapy [2]. This indeed has happened most notably in Japan, where BNCT now is being used to treat patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region, high-grade gliomas, meningiomas and melanomas. Similarly, there has been great interest in China, as indicated by an impressive number of publications coming from both of them [4, 6, 7]. In contrast to the active programs in Asia, there has been no recent clinical activity relating to BNCT in the United States and Europe. Hopefully, however, after many delays, a clinical program will be initiated in the near future in Finland using an ABNS to treat patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region. The obvious question is why there hasn't been interest in BNCT by clinicians in the United States and Europe? In this Editorial, we will address this question and hopefully make a convincing case for the further development of BNCT as a cancer treatment modality.

Why has it been so difficult to develop new boron delivery agents for BNCT? Very simply put, the requirements for such agents are very challenging [3, 5]. These include (1) delivery of ∼20-30 µg 10B/g tumor; (2) high (>1) tumor:normal tissue and tumor:blood boron concentration ratios during irradiation; and (3) rapid clearance of boron from normal tissues while persisting in the tumor during neutron irradiation. The intracellular localization of 10B in tumor cells is also important, and ideally, the closer to the nucleus, the better. To date, only two boron delivery agents have met many but not all of these requirements: a boron-containing derivative of phenylalanine, known as boronophenylalanine (BPA), and a polyhedral borane, known as sodium borocaptate (BSH). Finally, a major challenge in the development of effective boron delivery agents is their localization in all parts of the tumor and within all tumor cells. As reported by Elowitz et al. [8] and Goodman et al. [9], there was considerable variability in the boron concentrations of both BPA [8] and BSH [9] in multiple tissue samples taken from the same tumor. This would be especially true in brain tumors, since the blood-brain barrier limits trans-vascular entry of high-molecular weight boron delivery agents (>100 Da) into the tumor.

Many classes of boron-containing delivery agents have been proposed, and these broadly can be divided into low-molecular weight agents, such as amino acids, peptides, polyamines, nucleosides, carbohydrates, and porphyrins, and high-molecular weight agents, such as liposomes, proteins, monoclonal antibodies, and nanoparticles [5, 10]. Between 2018 and 2023, many new boron delivery agents with different chemical characteristics have been reported in both the chemical [5] and biological literature [10]. Based on studies in mice, we believe that the most promising of these is the 3-isomer of BPA (3-BPA), which has 10-100 times greater solubility than that of the 4-isomer of BPA (4-BPA) which currently is being used clinically [3]. The tumor uptake of 3-BPA in B16F10 melanoma-bearing mice was equal to that of 4-BPA [11], which requires complexing with fructose or sucrose to increase its solubility. A second promising chemical modification of BPA has been described by Nomoto et al. [12], who have reported that poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) can form complexes with BPA, thereby producing reversible boronated esters. In vitro studies revealed that PVA-BPA attained 3.6 times higher intracellular boron concentrations than the fructose-BPA complex. In vivo studies were carried out with murine CT26 colon cancer cells, implanted subcutaneously into mice, followed by intravenous administration of PVA-BPA and neutron irradiation. This resulted in a highly significant reduction in tumor volume over a 60-day period compared to unirradiated controls [12]. The uptake and retention of high-molecular weight delivery agents [4, 5, 10], such as monoclonal antibodies, albumin, anti-angiogenic peptides, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeting liposomes, and boron carrier exosomes modified with cell-penetrating peptides, recently have been evaluated, and further studies are warranted. However, none of these have, as yet, reached the stage of clinical evaluation.

When reviewing the current status of treatment delivery options of neutrons and comparing them with competing radiotherapeutic modalities, great progress has been made with BNCT over the past five years. It is well on the way to becoming a mainstream treatment modality in Japan and China. Over the past few decades, design improvements in both reactor and accelerator neutron beams have made considerable progress. Up until 2015, clinical BNCT was totally dependent upon nuclear reactors as neutron sources, which, to say the least, were not patient-friendly environments. The first major advance was the introduction of epithermal neutron beams in the 1960s, which led to the treatment of more deeply located tumors. The Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in Japan in 2011 resulted in the shutdown of all Japanese nuclear reactors except for the one at the Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute (KURRI) in Kumatori, Japan. Subsequently, in 2015, the nuclear catastrophe led to the introduction of ABNSs, which could be sited in hospitals. Over the past decade, ABNSs have become the mainstay of clinical BNCT in Japan, with at least four of them located in hospital settings [13]. Their clinical use has led to several commercial efforts to provide “turnkey” systems for hospital-based ABNS systems in Japan [13], soon in Finland [14], and several others at different stages of development, such as the Neuboron system being developed in China (https://en.neuboron.com/bnct). This has been the single most important development for the acceptance of BNCT as a cancer treatment modality. However, this transition has not been so easy, as exemplified by the experience of Neutron Therapeutics Inc. in Finland. It has taken over 5 years from the installation of the ABNS in 2018 to the initiation of a clinical trial to treat patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region in the summer of 2024. In many countries, even the installation of ABNSs as investigational use devices would require that they meet stringent safety requirements and control systems, which will be the only way that BNCT could move forward.

The earliest BNCT treatment planning systems (TPSs) were developed by research groups at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [15], the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, and the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute [13]. All these TPSs' were developed for reactor neutron sources. More recently, TPSs have been developed for ABNSs, and this could be an important step for the further advancement of BNCT as a cancer treatment modality. TPSs for BNCT have followed a similar trajectory as TPSs for conventional radiotherapy. For BNCT to be used in clinical trials, in the future TPSs will be required to comply with local regulations that are in effect. Along with commercially available ABNSs, TPSs' that are commercially developed and maintained [14] will be key to the next phase, in order for BNCT to gaining wider acceptance. Such systems must have planning tools that comply with data exchange standards developed in conventional radiotherapy for supporting clinical trials.

Significant technological advances have been made in radiotherapy delivery systems over the past few decades and these advances have provided a vast array of very precise treatment delivery options to radiation oncologists for both X-ray and charged particle-based therapies. The other key functionality that has developed over the past decade has been integrated image guidance systems and robotic treatment couches. These allow for very precise re-positioning of patients, thereby ensuring that the treatment target is accurately localized and monitored during treatment delivery. ABNSs that will be used for BNCT must integrate image guidance and robotic positioning systems in order to gain acceptance by the radiotherapy community. Furthermore, especially with commercially developed ABNSs, it is important to incorporate the features mentioned above, as well as advanced collimators, in order to optimize neutron beam delivery.

Looking back over the past six years, there has been significant progress in several areas: first and foremost, the widespread clinical use of ABNSs in Japan with at least four BNCT treatment centers currently in operation and several others either under construction or planned; second, the introduction of standardized treatment plans for patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region [16], the cost of which now is partially reimbursed by the Japanese National Health Care Agency; third, impressive clinical results that have been obtained in Japan for the treatment of patients with high-grade meningiomas [17], cutaneous [18], and extra-cutaneous melanomas and extra-mammary Paget's disease [19].

To answer the question posed at the beginning of this Editorial, “Why hasn't there been interest in BNCT by clinicians in the United States and Europe”, there are a number of significant challenges counterbalancing the gains that have been made. First, at this time, there are only two boron delivery agents in clinical use, BPA and, to a much lesser extent, BSH [3]. The best chances to move forward at this time would be to focus on chemical modifications of BPA [11, 12] and BSH, which could make them more effective boron delivery agents. Equally as important is to develop more effective methods for their delivery, especially in the Japanese clinical trial for patients with recurrent tumors of the head and neck region (JNH0002) [16] and for patients with recurrent high-grade meningiomas. Second, is to further define other types of malignancies that might make BNCT their preferred treatment. Among these are genital malignancies such as recurrent and refractory high-grade meningiomas [17], difficult-to-treat cutaneous melanomas [18], and extramammary Paget's disease and melanomas of the vulva [19]. Third, it must be recognized that there are a limited number of nuclear reactors that can be used to conduct radiation studies in experimental animals. Only the Japanese nuclear reactor at KURRI is being used for animal irradiations, which must be scheduled almost one year in advance since the reactor also is being used for non-biologic studies. In the United States, to the best of our knowledge, at the present time, there are only two nuclear reactors that can be used for animal irradiations, and these are the University of Missouri Research Reactor (Columbia, MO) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor (Boston, MA). In contrast, in China, there are at least four neutron sources that could be used for this purpose and at least two of them that could be used for the irradiation of large animals. Among these is the In-Hospital Neutron Irradiator-1 in Beijing, which has been used for both human and animal irradiations. This, together with the robust basic research programs in Japan and China, bode well for the future of BNCT. One of the significant advantages that we had in the United States, which sadly no longer exists, was the availability of the Brookhaven Medical Research Reactor that was decommissioned over 20 years ago. Fourth, there has been almost a complete lack of funding for BNCT-related research by the National Institutes of Health in the United States, while in contrast, there is significant funding for BNCT in several other countries. From all the above, it should be apparent that BNCT as a cancer treatment modality has had a number of successes but also is facing significant challenges. However, ending on an optimistic note, this is about to change with the possible siting of an ABNS [20] by TAE Life Sciences in the United States.

Gong Wu participated in the writing of the first draft of this Editorial. Maria da Graca H. Vicente participated in the writing of text related to Requirements for boron delivery agents for BNCT. John Grecula and Nilendu Gupta contributed to the text relating to the Neutron sources, treatment delivery and planning for BNCT. Rolf F. Barth wrote the text in the Introduction, Requirements for boron delivery agents and Conclusions.

None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to disclose.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
硼中子俘获疗法治疗癌症:我们的现状如何?
过去几十年来,反应堆和加速器中子束的设计改进取得了长足进步。直到 2015 年,临床 BNCT 完全依赖核反应堆作为中子源,至少可以说,这种环境对患者并不友好。第一个重大进展是在 20 世纪 60 年代引入了表皮中子束,从而治疗了位置更深的肿瘤。2011 年日本福岛核灾难导致日本所有核反应堆关闭,只有位于熊取的京都大学反应堆研究所(KURRI)的反应堆除外。随后,在 2015 年,核灾难促使人们引进了可安装在医院中的 ABNS。在过去十年中,ABNS 已成为日本临床 BNCT 的主流,其中至少有四台安装在医院环境中[13]。它们在临床上的使用已促使日本[13]、芬兰[14]和其他几个处于不同开发阶段的国家(如中国正在开发的 Neuboron 系统 (https://en.neuboron.com/bnct))开展了几项商业努力,为医院 ABNS 系统提供 "交钥匙 "系统。这是 BNCT 作为一种癌症治疗方式被接受的最重要的发展。然而,正如芬兰中子治疗公司(Neutron Therapeutics Inc.从 2018 年安装 ABNS 到 2024 年夏季启动治疗头颈部复发性肿瘤患者的临床试验,历时超过 5 年。在许多国家,即使作为研究用设备安装 ABNS,也需要满足严格的安全要求和控制系统,这将是 BNCT 向前发展的唯一途径。最早的 BNCT 治疗计划系统(TPS)是由麻省理工学院[15]、爱达荷国家工程实验室和日本原子能研究所[13]的研究小组开发的。所有这些 TPS 都是针对反应堆中子源开发的。最近,针对 ABNS 开发了 TPS,这可能是进一步推动 BNCT 作为癌症治疗方式的重要一步。用于 BNCT 的 TPS 与用于传统放射治疗的 TPS 的发展轨迹相似。未来,要在临床试验中使用 BNCT,TPS 必须符合当地的现行法规。为了让 BNCT 获得更广泛的认可,与商业化 ABNS 一样,商业化开发和维护的 TPS [14] 将是下一阶段的关键。在过去几十年中,放射治疗给药系统取得了重大技术进步,这些进步为放射肿瘤学家提供了大量非常精确的治疗给药选择,包括 X 射线和带电粒子疗法。过去十年中发展起来的另一个关键功能是集成图像引导系统和机器人治疗床。这些系统可对病人进行非常精确的重新定位,从而确保在治疗过程中准确定位和监控治疗目标。用于 BNCT 的 ABNS 必须集成图像引导系统和机器人定位系统,才能获得放疗界的认可。此外,尤其是商业开发的 ABNS,必须集成上述功能和先进的准直器,以优化中子束输送。回顾过去六年,我们在多个领域取得了重大进展:首先是 ABNS 在日本的广泛临床应用,目前至少有四家 BNCT 治疗中心在运行,还有几家正在建设或计划建设中;其次是为头颈部复发性肿瘤患者引入了标准化治疗方案[16],其费用目前由日本国民健康保险局报销一部分;第三,日本在治疗高级别脑膜瘤[17]、皮肤黑色素瘤[18]、皮肤外黑色素瘤和乳腺外 Paget 病[19]患者方面取得了令人瞩目的临床成果。要回答这篇社论开头提出的问题 "为什么美国和欧洲的临床医生对 BNCT 没有兴趣",有许多重大挑战抵消了已经取得的成果。首先,目前只有两种硼给药剂在临床上使用,一种是 BPA,另一种是 BSH[3]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Communications
Cancer Communications Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research
CiteScore
25.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
153
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Communications is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encompasses basic, clinical, and translational cancer research. The journal welcomes submissions concerning clinical trials, epidemiology, molecular and cellular biology, and genetics.
期刊最新文献
Effect of neutrophils on tumor immunity and immunotherapy resistance with underlying mechanisms. Tumor derived cell-free nucleic acid upregulates programmed death-ligand 1 expression in neutrophil via intracellular Toll-like receptor signaling. Wnt/GSK-3β mediates posttranslational modifications of FLYWCH1 to regulate intestinal epithelial function and tumorigenesis in the colon. Engineering heavy chain antibody-drug conjugates against solid tumors for a one-shot kill. Acquired RD3 loss regulates immune surveillance in high-risk and therapy defying progressive neuroblastoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1