ArticleMedical physics2019
Independent recalculation outperforms traditional measurement-based IMRT QA methods in detecting unacceptable plans.
Article in Medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- AAPM MEDICAL PHYSICS PRACTICE GUIDELINE 5.b: Commissioning and QA of treatment planning dose calculations-Megavoltage photon and electron beams.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Guideline
- To measure or not to measure: Is pre-treatment measurement of all IMRT plans a legacy practice?Medical physics · 2026Article
- COMP Report: Patient-specific quality assurance practices in Canadian radiotherapy-results from a national survey.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Monte Carlo-based independent dose calculation system for brain stereotactic radiotherapy using a robotic radiosurgery system.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Predicting patient-specific quality assurance outcomes in helical tomotherapy using plan complexity and 3D dose-distribution radiomics.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Determining optimal transit dosimetry gamma parameter values for the detection of failure modes using receiver operating curve analysis.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- A pathway away from measurement-based patient-specific QA: A review of contemporary quality assurance for external-beam radiotherapy sub-systems.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Review
- Sensitivity and specificity of Monte Carlo based independent secondary dose computation for detecting modulation-related dose errors in intensity modulated radiotherapy.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2025Article
- Generation, validation, and benchmarking of a commercial independent Monte Carlo calculation beam model for multi-target SRS.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2025Article
- Developing reference plans for evaluating global clinical trials credentialing and PSQA systems.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Accuracy of manufacturer integrated quality control for helical radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- AAPM task group report 135.B: Quality assurance for robotic radiosurgery.Medical physics · 2025Article
- The impact of plan complexity on calculation and measurement-based pre-treatment verifications for sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- A virtual phantom for patient-specific QA On A 1.5T MR-linac.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Commissioning and clinical implementation of an independent dose calculation system for scanned proton beams.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Commissioning of Mobius3D/FX for patient-specific quality assurance: The CUIMC-NewYork Presbyterian Hospital experience.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Detecting outliers beyond tolerance limits derived from statistical process control in patient-specific quality assurance.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- IMRT QA result prediction via MLC transmission decomposition.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Characterizing the interplay of treatment parameters and complexity and their impact on performance on an IROC IMRT phantom using machine learning.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2023Article
- Correlation between patient-specific quality assurance in volumetric modulated arc therapy and 2D dose image features.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the performance of an independent recalculation and compare it against current measurement-based patient specific intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA) in predicting unacceptable phantom results as measured by the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC).
methodsWhen institutions irradiate the IROC head and neck IMRT phantom, they are also asked to submit their internal IMRT QA results. Separately from this, IROC has previously created reference beam models on the Mobius3D platform to independently recalculate phantom results based on the institution's DICOM plan data. The ability of the institutions' IMRT QA to predict the IROC phantom result was compared against the independent recalculation for 339 phantom results collected since 2012. This was done to determine the ability of these systems to detect failing phantom results (i.e., large errors) as well as poor phantom results (i.e., modest errors). Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using common clinical thresholds, and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare across different thresholds.
resultsOverall, based on common clinical criteria, the independent recalculation was 12 times more sensitive at detecting unacceptable (failing) IROC phantom results than clinical measurement-based IMRT QA. The recalculation was superior, in head-to-head comparison, to the EPID, ArcCheck, and MapCheck devices. The superiority of the recalculation vs these array-based measurements persisted under ROC analysis as the recalculation curve had a greater area under it and was always above that for these measurement devices. For detecting modest errors (poor phantom results rather than failing phantom results), neither the recalculation nor measurement-based IMRT QA performed well.
conclusionsA simple recalculation outperformed current measurement-based IMRT QA methods at detecting unacceptable plans. These findings highlight the value of an independent recalculation, and raise further questions about the current standard of measurement-based IMRT QA.
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.