Carbon Ion Radiation not available in USA

Article on Carbon Ion radiation therapy not available in USA.

"Globally, carbon ion therapy is viewed as the next horizon of cancer care. about 22,000 patients have received the treatment at 13 centers in Germany, Austria, Italy, Japan, and China. More locations are under development in South Korea, Taiwan, and France.

Yet the therapy has followed an odd trajectory in the US. Although it was developed in California in 1975 and early research pointed to its advantages, not a single carbon ion facility, not even a research-oriented one, exists in the US. Other countries invested public money in the technology, but so far, American proponents of carbon ions have been unable to garner federal construction money or sufficient private backing."
https://www.wired.com/story/why-a-promising-potent-cancer-therapy-isnt-used-in-the-us/

Post Edited (RobertC) : 8/21/2019 12:37:49 PM (GMT-6)

Just read a number of reports and studies regarding Carbon Ion radiation. Similar to Proton as it uses the heavy matter rather than the light matter of photon based traditional radiation. In other words there is more mass in the proton and carbon particles than the photon, which are the lighter x-Rays. In one study from MD Anderson it reports that the measure of radiation strength is 1 for Photon. Proton is a measure of 1.1, so a bit more powerful. Carbon is a measure of at least 2.5, so much more powerful due to the greater weight. Photon is basically light waves. Proton and Carbon need tremendous accelerators to get the particles moving at 75% the speed of light, so much slower than photons. But, with greater mass even at a slower speed, they can deliver greater power. Remember E=MC2?

The short story is that the greater mass and strength bends the Bragg Peak better than Proton and makes the Carbon radiation a better killing proposition as it induces more complex DNA damage to the cancer cell. Also like Proton, it is affected magnetically so magnetic collimators can be used to bend the beam into more precise shapes. Photon is light based and the collimator merely blocks part of the beam to shape the radiation. All this means that theoretically Carbon might be better than Proton or Photon.

Several trials are under way that do show promise including one for prostate cancer. It used intermediate and high risk and compared to IMRT, each with ADT. IMRT had 92% clear at five years and Carbon achieved 96%. Not much difference. Greater advantages are shown in some of the very difficult cases to radiate such as head and neck, liver and pancreas. This is in line with Proton advantages over photon in these cancers. Proton generally shows the most advantage with pediatric cancers, but no studies are reported underway with Carbon.

But there is the cost. At the writing of the article a Proton center cost $200 million to build. The most recent is here in Atlanta and when it reached nearly $400 million they stopped reporting the cost. The report says Carbon would be 50% greater cost and nearly double the annual operating cost. There are 10 facilities in the world with none in the US. The two most referenced are in Heidelberg, Germany and Chiba, Japan. There was not any reference to any being planned in the US presently.