Document text
Machine-read from the scan, so expect some errors. Lines that couldn’t be read are left out.
Page 1
In September 1975, Dr. YNpp 8uggerted th8t h i s group could get u s on the air cllnicrrlly futer and more efficiently after the gru t ehutdawn If we r elected amid mum nurpber of " static beams" rather than waiting for the development of the dynamic bun system, as originally conceived by your group. A. a Mtter of fact, Dr. b8pp stated that with auch experience, ve may find that we would never need awept sumarg of converrations on September 9, 1975, between Drs. b a p p , Kelrey, Bradbury, and myself which di8C ~ S 8 of i el dsi zu8f ter the 1975, In vhich Drs. Bradbury and Relsey agree on three field sizes. The rtatic beam vere selected in September 1975. I8lSO enclose a memorandum of September 11, Finally, in Chicago on Deceaber 2, 1975, the Committee f o r Human Trials of Pion Radiotherapy, camposed of 18 leading radiotherapisto from around the country plus radiation physicists and biologists refined these voltmar to: Configuration 1: 5 X 5 X 5 ; Configuration 2: 8 X 10 X 7; There reco9lprandationo wera discussed after my return from the Chicag6 we ting,in Dr. I[napp's office with him, Kelaey, and Bradbury. Broup pointed out that it would be easier t o alter thmt slre8 t o of the further delay in completing the Breat shutdown, now soae six months overduo, there was plenty of time for any ot ber alter at fons, but none was suggested. These were the specific slzcs; these are tha sires w e can use; and no further alteration h8s been suggested by the Urn However, a t a meeting within the past few veeks, Dr. Xnapp suggested th8t we not attempt the largest al ze, 12 X 16 X 7, since he believes he can develop the swept beam i n the same time required t o develop this largest static beam. In ruury, your group and our group had agreed on the sizes and sh8pes and there has been no alt t ration in this demand. There has been some lack of understanding on the part of some members of the group about how these static burns could be used t o treat various cancers, uhich relates to their inexperience i n bringing physical energy t o human beings. This situation should improve as they obser= a greater number of patients I agreed t o these. Because We agreed t o go along with Dt. Knapp's suggestion. Dr. Knapp and I have had long discussions during the past year concerning Interrelationships. Since my conversations wtth Dr. Agnew, Dr. Knapp has suggested certain admlnistrntlve changes which I feel will alleviate some of the problems. Dr. Knapp has also accepted a suggestion by Dr. Kelsey
Page 2
Dr. Bradbury t h a t tauk force. be formed (throo have I have asked that these be chaired I;( some imt ances by UMI people and i n othero by LASL people. I think that these are met constructive changes brought about within the last three or four weeks. Therefore, t h e only area still unaddressed, and a serious one In view of continuod NCI support, is dosdvolume rate. 1feel that you, Dr. Agnaw, Dr. €lageram, Dr. Knapp, Dr. Kelrey and I must f u l l y understand where we are 8nd where we will be before the site visit for the grant supporting clinical trials of pion radiotherapy September 30 and October 1. the 8ix of u8 could meet i n your office or inthe conference room a t the Biomedic81 Facility during the current run t o discuss this. sider8tion would be to divert more time t o Dr. Knapp's development of the swept beam, vhich he tells me could significantly increase the Intensity in the Biomedical Channel over that which we are able to obtain with