ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2023
Film measurement and analytical approach for assessing treatment accuracy and latency in a magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy system.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced analysis of gating latency in 0.35T MR-linac through innovative time synchronization of a motion phantom and plastic scintillation detector.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Evaluation of dynamic accuracy and latency of a surface-guided radiotherapy system.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- Multi-institutional questionnaire-based survey on online adaptive radiotherapy performed using commercial systems in Japan in 2023.Radiological physics and technology · 2024Article
- Film measurement and analytical approach for assessing treatment accuracy and latency in a magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy system.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe measure the dose distribution of gated delivery for different target motions and estimate the gating latency in a magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) system.
methodThe dose distribution accuracy of the gated MRgRT system (MRIdian, Viewray) was investigated using an in-house-developed phantom that was compatible with the magnetic field and gating method. This phantom contains a simulated tumor and a radiochromic film (EBT3, Ashland, Inc.). To investigate the effect of the number of beam switching and target velocity on the dose distribution, two types of target motions were applied. One is that the target was periodically moved at a constant velocity of 5 mm/s with different pause times (0, 1, 3, 10, and 20 s) between the motions. During different pause times, different numbers of beams were switched on/off. The other one is that the target was moved at velocities of 3, 5, 8, and 10 mm/s without any pause (i.e., continuous motion). The gated method was applied to these motions at MRIdian, and the dose distributions in each condition were measured using films. To investigate the relation between target motion and dose distribution in the gating method, we compared the results of the gamma analysis of the calculated and measured dose distributions. Moreover, we analytically estimated the gating latencies from the dose distributions measured using films and the gamma analysis results.
resultsThe gamma pass rate linearly decreased with increasing beam switching and target velocity. The overall gating latencies of beam-hold and beam-on were 0.51 ± 0.17 and 0.35 ± 0.05 s, respectively.
conclusionsFilm measurements highlighted the factors affecting the treatment accuracy of the gated MRgRT system. Our analytical approach, employing gamma analysis on films, can be used to estimate the overall latency of the gated MRgRT system.
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.