  Background: A relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1 is used for
proton therapy though clinical evidence of varying RBE was raised. Clinical
studies on RBE variability have been conducted for decades for carbon
radiation, which could advance the understanding of the clinical proton RBE
given an ion-independent RBE model. In this work, such a model, linear and
simple, using the beam quantity Q = Z^2/E (Z = ion charge, E = kinetic energy
per nucleon) was tested and compared to the commonly used, proton-specific and
linear energy transfer (LET) based Wedenberg RBE model. Material and methods:
The Wedenberg and Q models, both predicting RBEmax and RBEmin (i.e., RBE at
vanishing and very high dose, respectively), are compared in terms of
ion-dependence and prediction power. An experimental in-vitro data ensemble
covering 115 publications for various ions was used as dataset. Results: The
model parameter of the Q model was observed to be similar for different ions
(in contrast to LET). The Q model was trained without any prior knowledge of
proton data. For proton RBE, the differences between experimental data and
corresponding predictions of the Wedenberg or the Q model were highly
comparable. Conclusions: A simple linear RBE model using Q instead of LET was
proposed and tested to be able to predict proton RBE using model parameter
trained based on only RBE data of other particles in a clinical proton energy
range for a large in-vitro dataset. Adding (pre)clinical knowledge from carbon
ion therapy may, therefore, reduce the dominating biological uncertainty in
proton RBE modelling. This would translate in reduced RBE related uncertainty
in proton therapy treatment planning.
