ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2020
Use of Gaussian-type functions for flux-based dose calculations in carbon ion therapy.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship between dose and stopping power values for electrons in skin and muscle tissues.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In radiation therapy, it is very important to ensure that the radiation dose is correctly delivered to the patient. This is achieved by obtaining quantitative dose measurements for beam calibration in the treatment planning system. Dose calculations should be performed with the required accuracy to a degree of uncertainty of less than 1%. The measurement of the absorbed dose in and around body tissues irradiated with carbon ions requires careful use of materials selected from established phantom and radiation detectors. The main advantage of such materials is that when information on the energy and nature of charged particles at the desired point is incomplete or inaccurate, they can allow determination of the absorbed dose. In general, radiation interactions in a tissue representation caused by carbon ions can be characterized by calculating the linear stopping power. Carbon ions have a limited penetration depth within human tissues that depends on the energy and stopping power of these ions as they penetrate into the body. The purpose of the present study was to calculate the stopping power, range and dose to intestinal and prostate tissues of carbon ions. The stopping power values of these tissues were specified by the effective charge approach method. The 5ZaPa-NR-CV, pcemd-4 and pcSseg-4 sets of Gaussian-type functions were employed for the calculation of electronic charge density. Range calculations were made by means of the Gaussian quadrature method, making use of the continuous slowing down approximation. Flux-based dose calculations were also carried out in accordance with the Bragg-Gray theorem using the Geant4 and FLUKA simulation toolkits. The results were compared with each other and with the SRIM and CasP datasets. Then, depth-dose distributions and range values were verified by positron emission activity using the GATE toolkit. Among the different types of Gaussian functions used here, the best semi-analytical result was found for the 5ZaPa-NR-CV set. The results obtained in the present study can be used for dose verification and dose reconstruction in charged particle radiotherapy and for radiation research on the interaction of radiation with matter. The results calculated here will be useful for quantifying uncertainties associated with stopping power, range, and reconstruction of dose in charged particle therapy.
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.