ArticleRadiological physics and technology2022
Simple quality assurance based on filtered back projection for geometrical/irradiation accuracy in single-isocenter multiple-target stereotactic radiotherapy.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of dedicated phantom for end-to-end testing of multiple image-guidance configurations incorporating light-section-based surface guidance system.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Technical Notes: Robustness of three-dimensional treatment and imaging isocenter testing using a new gel dosimeter and kilovoltage CBCT.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In single-isocenter multiple-target stereotactic radiotherapy (SIMT-SRT), it is difficult to evaluate both the geometrical accuracy and absorbed dose measurement when irradiating off-isocenter targets. This study aimed to develop a simple quality assurance (QA) method to evaluate off-isocenter irradiation position accuracy in SIMT-SRT and compare its feasibility with that of a commercial device. First, we created two types of inserts and metallic balls with a diameter of 5 mm to be inserted into a commercially available phantom (SIMT phantom). Second, we developed a dedicated analysis software using Python for the Winston-Lutz test (WLT). Third, an image processing software, including the filtered back-projection algorithm, was developed to analyze the images obtained using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Fourth, the feasibility of our method was evaluated by comparing it with the results of WLT using two commercially available phantoms: WL-QA and MultiMet-WL cubes. Notably, 92% of the results in one-dimensional deviations were within 0.26 mm (EPID pixel width). The correlation coefficients were 0.52, 0.92, and 0.96 in the left-right, superior-inferior, and anterior-posterior directions, respectively. In the WLT, a maximum two-dimensional deviation of 0.70 mm was detected in our method, while the deviation in the other method was within 0.5 mm. The advantage of our method is that it can evaluate the geometrical accuracy at any gantry angle during dynamic rotation irradiation using a filtered back-projection algorithm, even if the target is located off the isocenter. Our method can perform WLT at arbitrary positions and is suitable for the QA of dynamic rotation irradiation using an EPID.
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.