ArticleJournal of medical physics
Validation of the RapidArc Delivery System Using a Volumetric Phantom as Per Task Group Report 119 of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dosimetric Evaluation of Different Algorithms on Heterogeneous Slab Phantom Using CMS XiO and MONACO Treatment Planning System for 4MV, 6MV and 15MV Beam Energy: An Institutional Study.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- Dosimetric Evaluation of the Treatment Plan on Indigenous Heterogeneous Phantoms using Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm and Acuros-XB Algorithm for Different Photon Energies.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2022Article
- Dosimetric impact of Acuros XB on cervix radiotherapy using RapidArc technique: a dosimetric study.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2021Article
- An Analysis of Quality Assurance for Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Treatment Plans Using Two Dosimetric Methods: The arcCHECK System and EPIbeam Based Dosimetric Approach.Journal of medical physicsArticle
- Dosimetric Influence of Acuros XB Dose-to-Medium and Dose-to-Water Reporting Modes on Carcinoma Cervix Using Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric RapidArc Technique.Journal of medical physicsArticle
- To Study the Impact of Different Optimization Methods on Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy Plans for Hip Prosthesis Patients.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study validated the RapidArc (RA) delivery using a volumetric ArcCHECK phantom as per the guidelines proposed in Task Group Report 119 from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task group 119 (AAPM TG 119). This study also investigated the impact of the Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm in comparison to analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) on the RA dose calculations in the homogeneous medium of the ArcCHECK phantom. MATERIALS AND
methodsA volumetric ArcCHECK phantom along with AAPM TG 119 tests was used to evaluate the RA plans and verify the dose delivery for photon beam of 6 MV energy.
resultsThe RA planning results were comparable and satisfied the planning criteria stated in the TG 119 report for all test cases. The average percentage gamma passing rates for the AAA-calculated plans were 98.5 (standard deviation [SD]: 0.6), 98.5 (SD: 1.3), and 98.1 (SD: 2.0) and for the AXB-calculated plans were 95.1 (SD: 1.8), 96.1 (SD: 1.3), and 94.0 (SD: 0.9) for the Clinac-iX (6 MV) and TrueBeam (TB)-STx (6 MV_filtered beam [FB] and 6 MV_flattening filter-free beam [FFFB]), respectively. For ion chamber measurements, the average percentage dose differences for the AAA-calculated plans were 1.5 (SD: 2.5), 2.7 (SD: 1.4), and 1.4(SD: 2.7) and for AXB-calculated plans were 2.3 (SD: 1.6), 3.2 (SD: 1.5), and 2.3 (SD: 2.0) for Clinac-iX (6 MV) and TB-STx (6 MV_FB and 6 MV_FFFB), respectively.
conclusionThus, the ArcCHECK can successfully be utilized for the validation of the RA delivery. The AXB has potential to perform dose calculations comparable to those of the AAA for RA plans in the homogeneous medium of the ArcCHECK phantom.
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.