Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30220085›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2018

Technical Note: Characterization of clinical linear accelerator triggering latency for motion management system development.

Andrew J Shepard, Charles K Matrosic, Jeffrey L Radtke, Sydney A Jupitz, Wesley S Culberson, Bryan P Bednarz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Markerless Pancreatic Tumor Target Localization Enabled By Deep Learning.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrew J ShepardDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Charles K MatrosicDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Jeffrey L RadtkeDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Sydney A JupitzDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Wesley S CulbersonDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Bryan P BednarzDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.

Funding

U.W. RADIOLOGICAL SCIENCES TRAINING PROGRAMT32CA009206 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Bryan Patrick Bednarz · 1985 to 2026
$12.1M
Real-time Tumor Localization and Guidance for Radiotherapy Using US and MRIR01CA190298 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BEDNARZ, BRYAN PATRICK, FOO, THOMAS K · 2015 to 2019
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA190298NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009206NIH HHS R01CA190298NIH HHS T32CA009206
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLatencies for motion management systems have previously been presented as guidelines for system development and implementation. These guidelines consider the overall system latency, including data acquisition, algorithm processing, and linac triggering time. However, during system development, the triggering latency of the clinical linear accelerator is often considered fixed. This paper presents a method to decouple the linac-only triggering latency from the total system latency such that latency can be considered in terms of only the linac-independent aspects of the system.

methodsThe linac-only latency was investigated by considering the time at which a linac response was observed relative to the time at which a beam-on/off triggering signal was sent to the linac. The relative time between the two signals was analyzed using a multichannel oscilloscope with input signals from a custom gating box to manually trigger the beam state as well as a diode positioned at beam isocenter to monitor the linac response. The beam-on/off latency was measured at multiple energies (6/18 MV) and repetition rates (100-600 MU/min) to investigate beam setting dependencies.

resultsThe measured latency was observed to be dependent on the accelerator settings for repetition rate and energy, with beam-on latencies decreasing with increasing repetition rate and decreasing energy. In contrast, the opposite trend was present for the observed beam-off latency. At 600 MU/min, beam-on/off latencies were observed to be 3.37/1.45 ms for a 6 MV beam and 6.02/0.73 ms for an 18 MV beam. Negative latencies were possible for beam-off measurements due to the mechanical latency being less than the pulse separation at given repetition rates.

conclusionsThe linac latency associated with triggering the beam-on/off was determined to have a minor contribution to the total allowable system latency; thus, the majority of the total system latency can be attributed to linac-independent factors.

Indexed as

MovementParticle AcceleratorsRadiotherapybeam-offbeam-onlinac latencymotion managementtime delay

Identifiers

PMID30220085
PMCPMC6500588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.