ArticleJournal of radiation research2021
Technical Note: validation of a material assignment method for a retrospective study of carbon-ion radiotherapy using Monte Carlo simulation.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improvement of deep learning-based dose conversion accuracy to a Monte Carlo algorithm in proton beam therapy for head and neck cancers.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
- Medical application of particle and heavy ion transport code system PHITS.Radiological physics and technology · 2021Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We propose a two-step method to converse human tissue materials from patient computed tomography (CT) images, which is required in dose reconstructions for a retrospective study of carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) using Monte Carlo (MC) simulation. The first step was to assign the standard tissues of the International Commission on Radiological Protection reference phantoms according to the CT-number. The second step was to determine the mass density of each material based on the relationship between CT-number and stopping power ratio (Hounsfield unit [HU]-SPR) registered in treatment planning system (TPS). Direct implementation of the well-calibrated HU-SPR curve allows the reproduction of previous clinical treatments recorded in TPS without uncertainty due to a mismatch of the CT scanner or scanning conditions, whereas MC simulation with realistic human tissue materials can fulfill the out-of-field dose, which was missing in the record. To validate our proposed method, depth-dose distributions in the homogenous and heterogeneous phantoms irradiated by a 400 MeV/u carbon beam with an 8 cm spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) were computed by the MC simulation in combination with the proposed methods and compared with those of TPS. Good agreement of the depth-dose distributions between the TPS and MC simulation (within a 1% discrepancy in range) was obtained for different materials. In contrast, fluence distributions of secondary particles revealed the necessity of MC simulation using realistic human tissue. The proposed material assignment method will be used for a retrospective study using previous clinical data of CIRT at the National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS).
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.