ArticleMedical physics2025
Monte Carlo modeling of a commercial machine and experimental setup for FLASH-minibeam irradiations with electrons.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Megavoltage photon minibeam production through the embedded multi-leaf collimator of a clinical linac: A dosimetric characterization.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Experimental characterization of proton minibeam therapy delivery under FLASH dose-rate conditions.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advancing Proton Therapy: Integration of Minibeam Spatial Fractionation and FLASH Dose Rates.Research square · 2025Article
- Monte Carlo modeling of a commercial machine and experimental setup for FLASH-minibeam irradiations with electrons.Medical physics · 2025Article
- FLASH-RT for pulmonary protection: a comprehensive review of mechanisms, technological advances, and clinical translation.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
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
Abstract
backgroundUltra-high dose rate (UHDR/FLASH) irradiations, along with particle minibeam therapy (PMBT) are both emerging as promising alternatives to current radiotherapy techniques thanks to their improved healthy tissue sparing and similar tumor control. PURPOSE: Monte Carlo (MC) modeling of a commercial machine delivering 5-7 MeV electrons at UHDR. This model was used afterward to compare measurements against simulations for an experimental setup combining both FLASH and PMBT modalities.
methodsWe modeled the main accelerator elements with TOPAS3.8/Geant4.10.07.p03, optimized the electron source parameters, and subsequently benchmarked this geometry against measurements. Minibeam experiments were performed by delivering 7 MeV electrons at UHDR on three different 65-mm thick brass collimators as manufactured for protons with a 400-µm slit width: single slit, 5 slits with a center-to-center (CTC) distance of 4 mm and 9 slits with CTC of 2 mm. Finally, complementary simulations were run by changing critical PMBT collimator parameters to assess their specific impact on peak-to-valley dose ratio (PVDR) as well as on the Bremsstrahlung photon contribution to the total dose.
resultsPercentage depth dose (PDD) distributions and lateral dose profiles showed a good agreement between simulations and measurements, with a maximum discrepancy of less than 4%. With the PMBT collimators in place, discrepancies between simulated and measured dose profiles, lateral and in-depth in peaks and valleys, were within 3%. High PVDR between 5 and 26 were observed until 4 mm in the phantom. During the experiments, a mean dose rate of 167 Gy/s and an instantaneous dose rate of 1.2 × 10
conclusionsThe validation of the MC model and the configuration of an electron FLASH-minibeam setup were successfully completed, paving the way for future radiobiological investigations.
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.