ArticleRadiological physics and technology2023
Small-field dosimetry with detector-specific output correction factor for single-isocenter stereotactic radiotherapy of single and multiple brain metastases.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2023. 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.
- Influence of dose calculation algorithms on the helical diode array using volumetric-modulated arc therapy for small targets.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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine reported correction factors (CFs) for detector-response variation considering the uncertainty in detector readings in small-field dosimetry. In this study, the effect of CFs on small-field dosimetry measurements was evaluated for single-isocenter stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases. The output factors (OPFs) were measured with and without CFs in a water-equivalent sphere phantom using TrueBeam with a flattening-filter-free energy of 10 MV. Five detectors were used in a perpendicular orientation: CC01, 3D pinpoint ionization chambers, unshielded SFD detector, shielded EDGE detector, and microDiamond detector. First, the square-field sizes were set to 5-100 mm using a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) field. The OPFs were evaluated in the presence and absence of CFs. Second, single-isocenter stereotactic irradiation was performed on 22 brain metastases in 15 patients following dynamic conformal arc (DCA) treatment. The equivalent field size was calculated using the MLC aperture for each planning target volume. For the OPFs, the mean deviations from the median of the doses measured with detectors other than the CC01 for square-field sizes larger than 10 mm were within ± 4.3% of the median without CFs, and ± 3.3% with CFs. For DCA plans, the deviations without and with CFs were - 2.3 ± 1.9% and - 4.8 ± 2.4% for CC01, - 1.1 ± 3.0% and 1.0 ± 1.6% for 3D pinpoint, 8.8 ± 3.0% and 2.9 ± 2.8% for SFD, - 3.1 ± 3.0% and - 13.5 ± 4.0% for EDGE, and 8.9 ± 2.1% and 0.8 ± 1.9% for microDiamond. This feasibility study confirmed that the deviation of the detectors can be reduced using an appropriate detector with CFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36272022What 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.