| | 22 | - Discussion included the following pointers: |
| | 23 | - Need sentences at the beginning to place the initiative/institute in context; |
| | 24 | - Probably good idea to explain the breadth of the LhARA collaboration; 4-nations UK, international, Institut Curie in particular; |
| | 25 | - Need to emphasis key links with FOM/IC NHS H/c Trust (IMcN), OIRO (AG); |
| | 26 | - Add link to clinical applications: trials, transformation in clinical practice as ambition; |
| | 27 | - Line of sight to clinic; the "why" big picture; |
| | 28 | - Potential for spin-offs; |
| | 29 | - IBA, Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Procure: system-level potential for tie up with medical-equipment provider |
| | 30 | - Instrumentation and computing as incremental/long-term impact plan, and, no-loss theorem; valuable even if LhARA should fail. |
| | 31 | - Biological impact: |
| | 32 | - In particular, unique potential to provide capability to investigate "spatial/temporal impact of beams at very high doses" |
| | 33 | |
| | 34 | - We **agreed** that bullet level inout would be provided to CJ as follows: |
| | 35 | - **IMcN:** Pre-clincal/clinical facing aspects of institute initiative |
| | 36 | - **PP:** I/p on delivering "a new, novel, big, different thing" |
| | 37 | - **AG:** I/p on biology and capability for radiation biology |
| | 38 | |
