Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37696271›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2024

Evaluation of ion chamber response for applications in electron FLASH radiotherapy.

Kevin Liu, Shannon Holmes, Brian Hooten, Emil Schüler, Sam Beddar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Volumetric FLASH dosimetryPhysics in medicine and biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kevin LiuDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Shannon HolmesStandard Imaging Inc., Middleton, Wisconsin, USA.
Brian HootenStandard Imaging Inc., Middleton, Wisconsin, USA.
Emil SchülerDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Sam BeddarDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research: Preclinical optimization of ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) radiotherapy parameters for translational relevanceR01CA266673 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI SCHUELER, EMIL · 2022 to 2025
$3.5M
FY22 SBIR TOPIC 434 PHASE I - NOVEL NIST TRACEABLE IONIZATION CHAMBER FOR FLASH DOSIMETRY.75N91022C00039 · NCI · STANDARD IMAGING, INC. · PI HOLMES, SHANNON · 2022 to 2022
$400k
NCI NIH HHS 75N91022C00039NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS R01 CA266673
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ion chambers are required for calibration and reference dosimetry applications in radiation therapy (RT). However, exposure of ion chambers in ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) conditions pertinent to FLASH-RT leads to severe saturation and ion recombination, which limits their performance and usability. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate a set of commonly used commercially available ion chambers in RT, all with different design characteristics, and use this information to produce a prototype ion chamber with improved performance in UHDR conditions as a first step toward ion chambers specific for FLASH-RT. The Advanced Markus and Exradin A10, A26, and A20 ion chambers were evaluated. The chambers were placed in a water tank, at a depth of 2 cm, and exposed to an UHDR electron beam at different pulse repetition frequency (PRF), pulse width (PW), and pulse amplitude settings on an IntraOp Mobetron. Ion chamber responses were investigated for the various beam parameter settings to isolate their dependence on integrated dose, mean dose rate and instantaneous dose rate, dose-per-pulse (DPP), and their design features such as chamber type, bias voltage, and collection volume. Furthermore, a thin parallel-plate (TPP) prototype ion chamber with reduced collector plate separation and volume was constructed and equally evaluated as the other chambers. The charge collection efficiency of the investigated ion chambers decreased with increasing DPP, whereas the mean dose rate did not affect the response of the chambers (± 1%). The dependence of the chamber response on DPP was found to be solely related to the total dose within the pulse, and not on mean dose rate, PW, or instantaneous dose rate within the ranges investigated. The polarity correction factor (P

Indexed as

ElectronsRadiometryBenzeneacetamidesCalibrationPiperidonesWaterantineoplaston A10BenzeneacetamidesPiperidonesWaterdosimetryFLASHion chambers

Identifiers

PMID37696271
PMCPMC10840726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.