ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2019
External dosimetry audit for quality assurance of carbon-ion radiation therapy clinical trials.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Error on the stopping power ratio of ERKODENT's mouthpiece for head and neck carbon ion radiotherapy treatment.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Commissioning a newly developed treatment planning system, VQA Plan, for fast-raster scanning of carbon-ion beams.PloS one · 2022Article
- Evaluation of radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeter response for therapeutic spot scanning proton beam: suggestion of linear energy transfer-based correction.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe QA team of the Japan carbon-ion radiation oncology study group (J-CROS) was organized in 2015 to enhance confidence in the accuracy of clinical dosimetry and ensure that the facility QA procedures are adequate. The team conducted onsite dosimetry audits in all the carbon-ion radiation therapy centers in Japan. MATERIALS AND
methodsA special phantom was fabricated for the onsite dosimetry audit. Target volumes such as the GTV, CTV, and PTV were contoured to the obtained CT images, and two plans with different isocenter depths were created. The dose at the isocenter was measured by an ionization chamber, in the onsite audit and compared with the calculated dose.
resultsFor all the centers, the average of the percentage ratio between the measured and calculated doses (measured/calculated) was 0.5% (-2.7% to +2.6%) and the standard deviation, 1.7%. In all the centers, the beams were within the set tolerance level of 3%.
conclusionsThe audit demonstrated that the dose at a single point in the water phantom was within tolerance, but it is a big step to say that all doses are correct. In addition, this external dosimetry audit encouraged centers to improve the quality of their dosimetry systems.
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.