Computer Simulation of Tumor Treating Fields

Tumor treating electric fields or TTFields are emerging as a new treatment modality for cancer, and its first FDA-approved use is in glioblastoma patients. TTFields are alternating electric fields at 200 kHz continuously delivered by the Optune device to the scalp of patients. Preclinical experiments have shown that they interfere with dividing cancer cells as they undergo metaphase-to-anaphase transition in mitosis and, specifically, they disrupt α/β tubulin and septin proteins that have high dipole moments. However, the visualization of TTFields in the brain and therefore treatment verification require complex computational simulation and modeling of electromagnetic wave propagation, which entails added difficulties due to the different conductivity and relative permittivity values of various intracranial tissues and cavities. The procedure requires segmenting tissue structures as seen on the MRI, generating a 3-dimensional mesh for each segmented volume, and importing the composite mesh into a finite element solver of Maxwell’s equations. In turn, the finite element analysis process involves the identification and application of material parameters to different segmented tissue types, specification of appropriate boundary and initial conditions, as well as identification of the best fit solution for the electric field distribution, all of which are dependent on the transducer array layout as generated by proprietary NovoTAL computer software. Ultimately, the precise visualization of the TTFields in the glioblastoma and adjacent brain tissues may enable neuro-oncologists and physicist to improve TTField delivery in the brain.

[1]  E. Dekel,et al.  Disruption of cancer cell replication by alternating electric fields. , 2004, Cancer research.

[2]  E. McAdams,et al.  Factors affecting electrode-gel-skin interface impedance in electrical impedance tomography , 1996, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[3]  J. Ward Some biochemical consequences of the spatial distribution of ionizing radiation-produced free radicals. , 1981, Radiation research.

[4]  P. Basser,et al.  Predicting the electric field distribution in the brain for the treatment of glioblastoma , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  L. Parra,et al.  Optimized multi-electrode stimulation increases focality and intensity at target , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[6]  Edwin Lok,et al.  Tumor treating fields therapy device for glioblastoma: physics and clinical practice considerations , 2015, Expert review of medical devices.

[7]  E. Wong,et al.  Bevacizumab reverses cerebral radiation necrosis. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  D. Bates,et al.  Newton-Raphson and EM Algorithms for Linear Mixed-Effects Models for Repeated-Measures Data , 1988 .

[9]  M. Lacouture,et al.  Characterization and management of dermatologic adverse events with the NovoTTF-100A System, a novel anti-mitotic electric field device for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. , 2014, Seminars in oncology.

[10]  Jaime Prilusky,et al.  A server and database for dipole moments of proteins , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[11]  R. Leahy,et al.  Mapping human brain function with MEG and EEG: methods and validation , 2004, NeuroImage.

[12]  Chris Rorden,et al.  Automated lesion detection on MRI scans using combined unsupervised and supervised methods , 2015, BMC Medical Imaging.

[13]  Edwin Lok,et al.  Computed modeling of alternating electric fields therapy for recurrent glioblastoma , 2015, Cancer medicine.

[14]  Á. Pascual-Leone,et al.  Noninvasive human brain stimulation. , 2007, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[15]  Ray W. Clough,et al.  Early history of the finite element method from the view point of a pioneer , 2004 .

[16]  M. Turner Stiffness and Deflection Analysis of Complex Structures , 1956 .

[17]  A. Sahgal,et al.  Pathobiology of radiation myelopathy and strategies to mitigate injury , 2015, Spinal Cord.

[18]  L. Deangelis,et al.  Radiation‐induced dementia in patients cured of brain metastases , 1989, Neurology.

[19]  J. Cadet,et al.  Direct and indirect effects of UV radiation on DNA and its components. , 2001, Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology.

[20]  Riley Pa Free Radicals in Biology: Oxidative Stress and the Effects of Ionizing Radiation , 1994 .

[21]  Chang-Hwan Im,et al.  Determination of optimal electrode positions for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[22]  E. Wong,et al.  Tumor Treating Fields Perturb the Localization of Septins and Cause Aberrant Mitotic Exit , 2015, PloS one.

[23]  O. Zienkiewicz,et al.  The hierarchical concept in finite element analysis , 1983 .

[24]  Rosalind J. Sadleir,et al.  Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in a realistic head model , 2010, NeuroImage.

[25]  Eric T. Wong,et al.  Mitosis interference of cancer cells during anaphase by electric field from NovoTTF-100A: An update. , 2012 .

[26]  J. Ward,et al.  DNA damage produced by ionizing radiation in mammalian cells: identities, mechanisms of formation, and reparability. , 1988, Progress in nucleic acid research and molecular biology.

[27]  M. Bikson,et al.  Transcranial current stimulation focality using disc and ring electrode configurations: FEM analysis , 2008, Journal of neural engineering.

[28]  D. W. Scharpf,et al.  Finite element method — the natural approach , 1979 .