Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32614511›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2020

Automated and robust beam data validation of a preconfigured ring gantry linear accelerator using a 1D tank with synchronized beam delivery and couch motions.

Nels C Knutson, Matthew C Schmidt, Francisco J Reynoso, Yao Hao, Thomas R Mazur, Eric Laugeman, Geoffrey Hugo, Sasa Mutic, H Harold Li, Wilfred Ngwa and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Commissioning a secondary dose calculation software for a 0.35 T MR-linac.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022
    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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nels C KnutsonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Matthew C SchmidtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Francisco J ReynosoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5183-2841
Yao HaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Thomas R MazurDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Eric LaugemanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Geoffrey HugoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Sasa MuticDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
H Harold LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Wilfred NgwaDepartment of Physics, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
Bin CaiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Erno SajoDepartment of Physics, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USUniversity of Massachusetts Lowell · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop an efficient and automated methodology for beam data validation for a preconfigured ring gantry linear accelerator using scripting and a one-dimensional (1D) tank with automated couch motions. MATERIALS AND

methodsUsing an application programming interface, a program was developed to allow the user to choose a set of beam data to validate with measurement. Once selected the program generates a set of instructions for radiation delivery with synchronized couch motions for the linear accelerator in the form of an extensible markup language (XML) file to be delivered on the ring gantry linear accelerator. The user then delivers these beams while measuring with the 1D tank and data logging electrometer. The program also automatically calculates this set of beams on the measurement geometry within the treatment planning system (TPS) and extracts the corresponding calculated dosimetric data for comparison to measurement. Once completed the program then returns a comparison of the measurement to the predicted result from the TPS to the user and prints a report. In this work lateral, longitudinal, and diagonal profiles were taken for fields sizes of 6 × 6, 8 × 8, 10 × 10, 20 × 20, and 28 × 28 cm

resultsUsing this methodology, the TPS was validated to agree with measurement. All compared points yielded a gamma value less than 1 for a 1.5%/1.5 mm criteria (100% passing rate). Off axis profiles had >98.5% of data points producing a gamma value <1 with a 1%/1 mm criteria. All depth profiles produced 100% of data points with a gamma value <1 with a 1%/1 mm criteria. All data points measured were within 1.5% or 2 mm distance to agreement.

conclusionsThis methodology allows for an increase in automation in the beam data validation process. Leveraging the application program interface allows the user to use a single system to create the measurement files, predict the result, and then compare to actual measurement increasing efficiency and reducing the chance for user input errors.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedHumansParticle AcceleratorsRadiometryRadiotherapy Dosageautomated commissioningquality assuranceTPS validation

Identifiers

PMID32614511
PMCPMC7484825
OpenAlexW3039939318

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.