Nanoscale gold nanoparticle (GNP)‐laden tumor cell model and its use for estimation of intracellular dose from GNP‐induced secondary electrons

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundGold nanoparticles (GNPs) accumulated within tumor cells have been shown to sensitize tumors to radiotherapy. From a physics point of view, the observed GNP‐mediated radiosensitization is due to various downstream effects of the secondary electron (SE) production from internalized GNPs such as GNP‐mediated dose enhancement. Over the years, numerous computational investigations on GNP‐mediated dose enhancement/radiosensitization have been conducted. However, such investigations have relied mostly on simple cellular geometry models and/or artificial GNP distributions. Thus, it is at least desirable, if not necessary, to conduct further investigations using cellular geometry models that properly reflect realistic cell morphology as well as internalized GNP distributions at the nanoscale.PurposeThe primary aim of this study was to develop a nanometer‐resolution geometry model of a GNP‐laden tumor cell for computational investigations of GNP‐mediated dose enhancement/radiosensitization. The secondary aim was to demonstrate the utility of this model by quantifying GNP‐induced SE tracks/dose distribution at sub‐cellular levels for further validation of a nanoscopic dose point kernel (nDPK) method against full‐fledged Geant4 Monte Carlo (MC) simulation.MethodsA transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of a single cell showing cytoplasm, cellular nucleus, and internalized GNPs in the cellular endosome was segmented into sub‐cellular levels based on pixel value thresholding. A corresponding material density was allocated to each pixel, and, by adding a thickness, each pixel was transformed to a geometric voxel and imported as a Geant4‐acceptable input geometry file. In Geant4‐Penelope MC simulation, a clinical 6 MV photon beam was applied, vertically or horizontally to the cell surface, and energy deposition to the cellular nucleus and cytoplasm, due to SEs emitted by internalized GNPs, was scored. Next, nDPK calculations were performed by generating virtual electron tracks from each GNP voxel to all nucleus and cytoplasm voxels. Subsequently, another set of Geant4 simulation was performed with both Penelope and DNA physics models under the geometry closely mimicking in vitro cell irradiation with a clinical 6 MV photon beam, allowing for derivation of nDPK specific to this geometry and further comparison between Gean4 simulation and nDPK method.ResultsThe Geant4‐calculated SE tracks and associated energy depositions showed significant dependence on photon incidence angle. For perpendicular incidence, nDPK results showed good agreement (average percentage pixel‐to‐pixel difference of 0.4% for cytoplasm and 0.5% for nucleus) with Geant4 results, while, for parallel incidence, the agreement became worse (–1.7%–0.7% for cytoplasm and –5.5%–0.8% for nucleus). Under the 6 MV cell irradiation geometry, nDPK results showed reasonable agreement (pixel‐to‐pixel Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient of 0.91 for cytoplasm and 0.98 for nucleus) with Geant4 results.ConclusionsThe currently developed TEM‐based model of a GNP‐laden cell offers unprecedented details of realistic intracellular GNP distributions for nanoscopic computational investigations of GNP‐mediated dose enhancement/radiosensitization. A benchmarking study performed with this model showed reasonable agreement between Geant4‐ and nDPK‐calculated intracellular dose deposition by SEs emitted from internalized GNPs, especially under perpendicular incidence — a popular cell irradiation geometry and when the Geant4‐Penelope physics model was used.