Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31776395›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Validation of a Monte Carlo simulation for Microbeam Radiation Therapy on the Imaging and Medical Beamline at the Australian Synchrotron.

Andrew Dipuglia, Matthew Cameron, Jeremy A Davis, Iwan M Cornelius, Andrew W Stevenson, Anatoly B Rosenfeld, Marco Petasecca, Stéphanie Corde, Susanna Guatelli, Michael L F Lerch

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors.

Andrew DipugliaCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Matthew CameronCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Jeremy A DavisCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Iwan M CorneliusCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Andrew W StevensonCSIRO, Clayton, 3168, Australia.
Anatoly B RosenfeldCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Marco PetaseccaCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Stéphanie CordeCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0388-7340
Susanna GuatelliCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia.
Michael L F LerchCentre for Medical and Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, 2522, Australia. mlerch@uow.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbeam Radiation Therapy (MRT) is an emerging cancer treatment modality characterised by the use of high-intensity synchrotron-generated x-rays, spatially fractionated by a multi-slit collimator (MSC), to ablate target tumours. The implementation of an accurate treatment planning system, coupled with simulation tools that allow for independent verification of calculated dose distributions are required to ensure optimal treatment outcomes via reliable dose delivery. In this article we present data from the first Geant4 Monte Carlo radiation transport model of the Imaging and Medical Beamline at the Australian Synchrotron. We have developed the model for use as an independent verification tool for experiments in one of three MRT delivery rooms and therefore compare simulation results with equivalent experimental data. The normalised x-ray spectra produced by the Geant4 model and a previously validated analytical model, SPEC, showed very good agreement using wiggler magnetic field strengths of 2 and 3 T. However, the validity of absolute photon flux at the plane of the Phase Space File (PSF) for a fixed number of simulated electrons was unable to be established. This work shows a possible limitation of the G4SynchrotronRadiation process to model synchrotron radiation when using a variable magnetic field. To account for this limitation, experimentally derived normalisation factors for each wiggler field strength determined under reference conditions were implemented. Experimentally measured broadbeam and microbeam dose distributions within a Gammex RMI457 Solid Water

Indexed as

Computer SimulationDose Fractionation, RadiationMonte Carlo MethodElectronsHumansMagnetic FieldsPhantoms, ImagingPhotonsRadiotherapy, Computer-AssistedSoftwareSynchrotronsX-Rays

Identifiers

PMID31776395
PMCPMC6881291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.