ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2024
Accuracy of Beamscan Software in Determining the Inflection Point from the FFF Beam Profile Using Several Array Detectors.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe goal of this study is to determine the accuracy of the PTW Beamscan program in determining the inflection point from Flattening Filter Free Beam Profile utilizing Multiple Detectors.
methodsTrue Beam Linear Accelerator with 6FFF and 10FFF Photon Energies and 10 cm, 15 cm and 20 cm Field Sizes were used for this study. Profile measurements were taken with PTW's 729, 1,500, and 1,600 and the Starcheck system, the Pinpoint 3D with Beamscan system, and Linac's EPID. The first-order derivative was utilized in both the Excel spreadsheet and Beamscan software to analyse raw measured data to locate inflection point and the FWHM was calculated. The accuracy of inflection points and FWHM between the Excel sheet calculation and the software program were investigated.
resultsFor 10X10 cm2 in the 729 Array, the greatest differences in FWHM were 5.16 mm and 5.04 mm for the X6 FFF and X10 FFF Energies, respectively. The largest difference was 2.26 mm for 1,600 SRS arrays with a 15×15 cm2 field size. The difference in FWHM between Manual and software analysis for 10X10 cm2 and 20X20 cm2 Field Sizes is in decreasing order for detectors from 729, 1,500, 1,600 SRS, Starcheck, Pinpoint 3D, and EPID. In contrast, there is no climbing or declining pattern detected in the difference in Field Width for the 15×15 cm2 Field Size. Similarly, for all detectors except the 1,600 SRS array, the peak of the first-order derivative occurs at the chamber position for a 15X15 cm2 field size.
conclusionThe higher resolution of measurement yields more accuracy in inflection point and the FWHM. Irrespective of measurement resolution, the Beamscan software provided the FWHM closer to the respective nominal Field Size. Out of all detectors, results obtained with Excel Starcheck and EPID are good in agreement with values obtained by the software analysis. Thus, it is shown that Beamscan software is so accurate in determining inflection point of a FFF beam profile and used for routine profile analysis.
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.