ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2014
Surface dose characterisation of the Varian Ir-192 HDR conical surface applicator set with a vertically orientated source.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConical surface applicators with an Ir-192 high-dose-rate brachytherapy source are a common modality for the treatment of non-melanomatous skin cancer with high tumour control rates. Surface dose characterisation of the Varian Varisource GammaMed+ IX afterloader vertical type surface applicators is performed two dimensionally using high-resolution film dosimetry.
aimThe focus of this study was to determine if Varian surface applicators with a vertical source suffer from the dose distribution irregularities reported for comparable applicators. Our goal was to evaluate if the irregularities found affected treatment and dose output verification procedures.
methodsIonisation chamber-based verification of applicator output was established according to guidelines provided by the manufacturer. For additional measurement of surface dose Gafchromic EBT3 film dosimetry was used. The term "therapeutic dose" was defined as 85% of the prescribed dose level.
resultsFor the 10 different applicator inserts evaluated, cold spots were observed. Mean cold spot size was 2.0 mm × 3.6 mm (± 0.6 mm). The cold spots were dosimetrically well below 85% of the prescribed dose. The cold spot was situated 2.2 mm (1.4-2.7 mm) unilaterally from the central axis and caused general asymmetry in the dose profiles intersecting the cold spot area. A source tilt of approximately 8° (± 1°) was determined for the source used for irradiation.
conclusionsA central underdosed area exceeding 15 % of the prescribed dose has not been previously reported. Source tilt was observed and found to affect clinical use and possibly treatment outcome in applicators using a vertically arranged source. Surface applicators with a vertically orientated source were subject to dose irregularities that could impact on chamber-based applicator output verification procedures. We recommend film dosimetry-backed applicator commissioning to avoid systematic errors.
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.