Trial reportJournal of applied clinical medical physics2012
The impact of continuously-variable dose rate VMAT on beam stability, MLC positioning, and overall plan dosimetry.
Trial report in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a DICOM-based prediction model for instantaneous dose rate and delivery time in VMAT.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Comparative dosimetric evaluation of independent verification systems: ArcherQA versus AccuCheck for volumetric modulated Arc therapy plan validation.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Dose-rate dependence and IMRT QA suitability of EBT3 radiochromic films for pulse reduced dose-rate radiotherapy (PRDR) dosimetry.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- A Comparison Study Between CNN-Based Deformed Planning CT and CycleGAN-Based Synthetic CT Methods for Improving iCBCT Image Quality.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Validation of a secondary dose check tool against Monte Carlo and analytical clinical dose calculation algorithms in VMAT.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
- Feasibility of a GATE Monte Carlo platform in a clinical pretreatment QA system for VMAT treatment plans using TrueBeam with an HD120 multileaf collimator.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2019Article
- VMAT linear accelerator commissioning and quality assurance: dose control and gantry speed tests.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2016Article
- Time-resolved beam symmetry measurement for VMAT commissioning and quality assurance.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2016Article
- Delivery efficiency of an Elekta linac under gated operation.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A recent control system update for Elekta linear accelerators includes the ability to deliver volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with continuously variable dose rate (CVDR), rather than a number of fixed binned dose rates (BDR). The capacity to select from a larger range of dose rates allows the linac to maintain higher gantry speeds, resulting in faster, smoother deliveries. The purpose of this study is to investigate two components of CVDR delivery - the increase in average dose rate and gantry speed, and a determination of their effects on beam stability, MLC positioning, and overall plan dosimetry. Initially, ten VMAT plans (5 prostate, 5head and neck) were delivered to a Delta4 dosimetric phantom using both the BDR and CVDR systems. The plans were found to be dosimetrically robust using both delivery methods, although CVDR was observed to give higher gamma pass rates at the 2%/2 mm gamma level for prostates (p < 0.01). For the dual arc head-and-neck plans, CVDR delivery resulted in improved pass rates at all gamma levels (2%/2 mm to 4%/4 mm) for individual arc verifications (p < 0.01), but gave similar results to BDR when both arcs were combined. To investigate the impact of increased gantry speed on MLC positioning, a dynamic leaf-tracking tool was developed using the electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Comparing the detected MLC positions to those expected from the plan, CVDR was observed to result in a larger mean error compared to BDR (0.13 cm and 0.06 cm, respectively, p < 0.01). The EPID images were also used to monitor beam stability during delivery. It was found that the CVDR deliveries had a lower standard deviation of the gun-target (GT) and transverse (AB) profiles (p < 0.01). This study has determined that CVDR may offer a dosimetric advantage for VMAT plans. While the higher gantry speed of CVDR appears to increase deviations in MLC positioning, the relative effect on dosimetry is lower than the positive impact of a flatter and more stable beam profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.