ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2023
Regression fitting megavoltage depth dose curves to determine material relative electron density in radiotherapy.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of differences in computed tomography value-electron density/physical density conversion tables on calculate dose in low-density areas.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relative electron density (RED) parameter is ubiquitous throughout radiotherapy for clinical dosimetry and treatment planning purposes as it provides a more accurate description of the relevant radiological properties over mass density alone. RED is in practice determined indirectly from calibrated CT Hounsfield Units (HU). While CT images provide useful 3D information, the spectral differences between CT and clinical LINAC beams may impact the validity of the CT-ED calibration, especially in the context of novel tissue-mimicking materials where deviations from biologically typical atomic number to atomic weight ratios 〈Z/A〉 occur and/or high-Z materials are present. A theoretical basis for determining material properties directly in a clinical beam spectrum via an electron-density equivalent pathlength (eEPL) method has been previously established. An experimental implementation of this approach is introduced whereby material-specific measured percentage depth dose curves (PDDs) are regressed to a PDD measured in a reference material (water), providing an inference of 〈Z/A〉, which when combined with the physical density provides a determination of RED. This method is validated over a range of tissue-mimicking materials and compared against the standard CT output, as well as compositional information obtained from the manufacturer's specifications. The measured PDD regression method shows consistent results against both manufacturer-provided and CT-derived values between 0.9 and 1.15 RED. Outside of this soft-tissue range a trend was observed whereby the 〈Z/A〉 determined becomes unrealistic indicating the method is no longer reporting RED alone and the assumptions around the eEPL model are constrained. Within the soft-tissue RED range of validity, the regression method provides a practical and robust characterisation for unknown materials in the clinical setting and may be used to improve on the CT derived RED where high Z material components are suspected.
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.