Hits: 0
Mr. Klein tells WPCNR the New York Presbyterian Hosptal proton accelerator under consideration, manufactured by Optivus systems is not easily adaptable to the cyclotron stable beam technology developed for the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland, as New York Presbyterian Hospital apparently assumes from today’s statement issued by Geoff Thompson, the NYPH spokesperson.
FIRST IN A SERIES OF GERMAN CENTERS
WPCNR has also learned that the ACCEL system “stable beam technology” is the type of proton accelerator system, a compact accelerator (cyclotron) with a direct beam capability, is expected to replace all of Germany’s 400 linear accelerators as well as the gamma knive systems, with 10 to 20 proton centers similar to the Rinecker Proton Therapy Center, which will be operated a private commercial center.
There is also a new study out this year, providing more evidence that proton therapy works to stop cancer tumours cold, without side effects, making it, apparently a more valuable asset to
Beam Me, Scotty.
New released research appearing in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics in 2004 report the proton therapy as practiced at the Loma Linda University Medical Center in California is effective in curing cancer even among patients with high P.S.A. counts, the blood count indicating presence of cancer in the body.
From 1992 to 1997, the Loma Linda beamed cured 90% of persons diagnosed with tumour cancers with a low P.S.I. rate of less than 4.0, and 82% of those patients with a P.S.I. rate of
Curiously, according to statistics provided by Pro Health Ag, the owner-developers of the
The results are that only 45% of cases are cured. The radiotherapy cure rate varies form 0% to 96%.
Loma Linda Pioneering Device has a Second Generation Model
WPCNR (from first reports last week by SwissInfo note previous story), learned that the compact proton accelerator which ACCEL manufactures requires less space, less power, and delivers a more effective, accurate proton punch to cancer tumours than the Loma Linda accelerator manufactured by Optivus, previously planned by the New York Presbyterian Hospital. The new cyclotron with the fixed beam was developed by the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland.
Mr. Klein explains the difference between the new compact accelerator and the Loma Linda pioneer device: “The Loma Linda type accelerator is a synchrotron, which has a discontinuous beam by nature and needs a higher controlling effort to get it stable. Cyloctrons (the Accel accelerator) instead deliver a continuous and stable flow of protons. Upgrading (a synchrotron) is a very costly and time consuming thing, interrupting operations.”
WPCNR asked if the new ACCEL device was U.S. F.D.A.-approved, and Mr. Klein advised “FDA approval for proton therapy systems is a process ALONG with engineering design and manufacturing according to our discussions with them.”
Less Costly?
WPCNR inquired about the cost of the ACCEL cyclotron being installed in
When the proton accelerator Optivus, Loma Linda model was originally proposed by the
Doctor Reaction?
Mr. Klein said doctors like the more versatile beam on the new ACCEL compact cyclotron: “Doctors are more interested in the treatment modalities, beam characteristics, patient environment, planning systems, integrated software, etc. They don’t care so much about the accelerator although this is the heart of the system defining beam quality, scanning speeds to a large extent.”
Power Use of New Accelerator Slightly More Efficent.
Klein said the
To put this into perspective, 9.25 Megawatts the peak power demand (the EIS appears not to mention the average power demand), is enough power to light 92,500 100 watt light bulbs, and to light 4 light bulbs in every one of the 25,000 households in White Plains.
The Treatment Difference.
WPCNR wanted a layman’s definition of the main difference between the Loma Linda accelerator and the ACCEL accelerator in
Klein whose company which is creating the proton accelerator for the
Building Does Not Have to Be As Large.
WPCNR asked if the ACCEL accelerator could fit into an existing building. Klein said this was not possible but did allow that it was “compact” as its description implies:
“The requirements of the footprint of a proton therapy system plus the radiation shielding necessities usually require a tailor-made building. There are only a few cases worldwide where parts of existing buildings could be used for proton therapy systems brought in. Those buildings however had been used for housing other accelerator equipment before.”
For extensive coverage of the



































