Journal of the Korean Physical Society

Korean Physical Society (한국물리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Feasibility Study on the Use of a Superconducting Synchrocyclotron and Electron Beam Ion Source for Heavy-Ion Therapy

  • Kim, Jongwon (Rare Isotope Science Project, Institute for Basic Science)
  • Received : 2017.12.18
  • Published : 2018.10.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A superconducting synchrocyclotron was suggested for proton therapy by H. Blosser of Michigan State University in '80, and it became a major machine for therapy cyclotron vendors because of its compact design with high magnetic fields of up to 9 T utilizing a $Nb_3Sn$ superconductor. Compared to an isochronous cyclotron, its dependence on the precision and the stability of the magnetic field is lessened. A low-beam current is a weak point due to pulsing of both radio-frequency (rf) and magnetic fields. However, that is of no concern for protons with the use of high-current pulsed sources. For heavy-ion therapy, the ion source can be an electron beam ion source (EBIS), which can produce high-current, fully charge-stripped and pulsed heavy ions. A study was carried out to evaluate a feasible design of superconducting synchrocyclotron system. If the low cost of a synchrocyclotron and well-advanced superconducting technology are considered, superconducting synchrocyclotron combined with an EBIS can be a legitimate candidate for a next-generation heavy-ion therapy machine.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Research Foundation (NRF)

References

  1. Y. Jongen, in Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Cyclotron and Their Applications, edited by Y. Yuan et al. (Joint Accelerator ConferenceWebsite 2010), p. 398.
  2. G. Karamysheva et al., in Proceedings of 21th International Conference on Cyclotron and Their Applications, edited by J. Chrin et al. (Joint Accelerator Conference Website 2016), p. 371.
  3. T. Ohno et al., Cancers 2011, 4046 (2011).
  4. H. Eickho and U. Linz, Rev. Accel. Sci. Tech. 1, 143 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793626808000083
  5. J. Kim et al., J. Korean Phys. Soc. 43, 325 (2003).
  6. Y. Jongen et al., in Proceedings of EPAC 2006, edited by C. Petit-Jean-Genaz et al. (Joint Accelerator Conference Website 2006), p. 1678.
  7. J. Kang et al., IEEE Trans Appl. Supercond. 22, 4401104 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/TASC.2011.2174567
  8. J. Matthews, Physics Today 62, 22 (2009).
  9. H. Blosser, Nucl. Instru. Meth. B 40/41, 1326 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-583X(89)90649-6
  10. A. Papash, G. Karamysheva and L. Onischenko, in Proceedings of Russian Particle Accelerator Conference (Protvino, Russia, Sep. 27 - Oct. 1, 2010), p. 393.
  11. R. Becker et al., in Proceedings of EPAC98 (Stockholm, Sweden, June 22-26, 1998), p. 2345.
  12. Los Alamos Accelerator Code Group, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2006.
  13. J. Kim et al., IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 3, 266 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1109/77.233722
  14. M. Gordon and X. Wu, in Proceedings of 1987 Particle Accelerator Conference, edited by E. Lindstrom and L. S. Taylor (Washington D. C., USA, Mar 16-19, 1987), p. 1255.
  15. A. Shornikov and F. Wenander, J. Instrumen. 11, T04001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/11/04/T04001
  16. A. Pikin, E. Beebe and D. Raparia, Rev. Sci. Instru. 84, 033303 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4793773
  17. Y. Park, H. Son and J. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 69, 962 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.69.962
  18. R. Mertzig et al., Nucl. Instru. Meth. A 859, 102 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.12.036
  19. R. Becker, O. Kester and Th. Stoehlker, in Journal of Physics: Conference Series 58 (IOP Publishing, 2007), p. 443. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/58/1/102
  20. E. Ritter et al., in Proceedings of IPAC2014, edited by C. Petit-Jean-Genaz et al. (Dresden, Germany, June 15-20, 2014), p. 2153.