ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2021
The accuracy of helium ion CT based particle therapy range prediction: an experimental study comparing different particle and x-ray CT modalities.
Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of a helium-beam radiography system based on thin pixel detectors for an anthropomorphic head phantom.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Imaging lung tumor motion using integrated-mode proton radiography-A phantom study towards tumor tracking in proton radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Focus stacking single-event particle radiography for high spatial resolution images and 3D feature localization.Physics in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- A review of the clinical introduction of 4D particle therapy research concepts.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Review
- Emerging technologies for cancer therapy using accelerated particles.Progress in particle and nuclear physics · 2023Article
- Considerations for Upright Particle Therapy Patient Positioning and Associated Image Guidance.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This work provides a quantitative assessment of helium ion CT (HeCT) for particle therapy treatment planning. For the first time, HeCT based range prediction accuracy in a heterogeneous tissue phantom is presented and compared to single-energy x-ray CT (SECT), dual-energy x-ray CT (DECT) and proton CT (pCT). HeCT and pCT scans were acquired using the US pCT collaboration prototype particle CT scanner at the Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center. SECT and DECT scans were done with a Siemens Somatom Definition Flash and converted to RSP. A Catphan CTP404 module was used to study the RSP accuracy of HeCT. A custom phantom of 20 cm diameter containing several tissue equivalent plastic cubes was used to assess the spatial resolution of HeCT and compare it to DECT. A clinically realistic heterogeneous tissue phantom was constructed using cranial slices from a pig head placed inside a cylindrical phantom (ø150 mm). A proton beam (84.67 mm range) depth-dose measurement was acquired using a stack of GafchromicTM EBT-XD films in a central dosimetry insert in the phantom. CT scans of the phantom were acquired with each modality, and proton depth-dose estimates were simulated based on the reconstructions. The RSP accuracy of HeCT for the plastic phantom was found to be 0.3 ± 0.1%. The spatial resolution for HeCT of the cube phantom was 5.9 ± 0.4 lp cm
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.