ArticleJournal of medical physics
Comparison of Phase-Gated and Amplitude-Gated Dose Delivery to a Moving Target using Gafchromic EBT3 Film.
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 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.
- Optimization of image reconstruction technique for respiratory-gated lung stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment planning using four-dimensional CT: a phantom study.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study compared phase-gated and amplitude-gated dose deliveries to the moving gross tumor volume (GTV) in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using Gafchromic External Beam Therapy (EBT3) dosimetry film. MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty treatment plans using two techniques (40 phase gated and 40 amplitude gated) were delivered using dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT). The GTV motion, breathing amplitude, and period were taken from 40 lung SBRT patients who performed regular breathing. These parameters were re-simulated using a modified Varian breathing mini phantom. The dosimetric accuracy of the phase- and amplitude-gated treatment plans was analyzed using Gafchromic EBT3 dosimetry film. The treatment delivery efficacy was analyzed for gantry rotation, number of monitor unit (MU), and target position per triggering window. The time required to deliver the phase- and amplitude-gated treatment techniques was also evaluated.
resultsThe mean dose (range) per fraction was 16.11 ± 0.91 Gy (13.04-17.50 Gy) versus 16.26 ± 0.83 Gy (13.82-17.99 Gy) (
conclusionAmplitude-gated DCAT allows for better dosimetric accuracy over phase-gated treatment patients with regular breathing patterns.
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.