ArticleBrachytherapy
Impact of source position on high-dose-rate skin surface applicator dosimetry.
Article in Brachytherapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- AAPM medical physics practice guideline 13.a: HDR brachytherapy, part B.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Guideline
- Activity-dependent transit dose assessment inPrecision radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Non-melanoma Skin Cancer Treated by Contact High-dose-rate Radiotherapy (Brachytherapy): A Mono-institutional Series and Literature Review.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Review
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
Abstract
purposeSkin surface dosimetric discrepancies between measured and treatment planning system predicted values were traced to source position sag inside the applicator and to source transit time. We quantified their dosimetric impact and propose corrections for clinical use. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We measured the dose profiles from the Varian Leipzig-style high-dose-rate (HDR) skin applicator, using EBT3 film, photon diode, and optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter for three different GammaMedplus HDR afterloaders. The measured dose profiles at several depths were compared with BrachyVision Acuros calculated profiles. To assess the impact of the source sag, two different applicator orientations were considered. The dose contribution during source transit was assessed by comparing diode measurements using an HDR timer and an electrometer timer.
resultsDepth doses measured using the three dosimeters were in good agreement, but were consistently higher than the Acuros dose calculations. Measurements with the applicator face up were significantly (exceeding 10%) lower than those in the face down position, due to source sag inside the applicator. Based on the inverse square law, the effective source sag was evaluated to be about 0.5 mm from the planned position. The additional dose during source transit was evaluated to be about 2.8% for 30 seconds of treatment with a 40700 U (10 Ci) source.
conclusionWith a very short source-to-surface distance, the small source sag inside the applicator has a significant dosimetric impact. This effect is unaccounted for in the vendor's treatment planning template and should be considered before the clinical use of the applicator. Further investigation of other applicators with large source lumen diameter may be warranted.
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.