ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2024
Dosimetric Evaluation of Different Algorithms on Heterogeneous Slab Phantom Using CMS XiO and MONACO Treatment Planning System for 4MV, 6MV and 15MV Beam Energy: An Institutional Study.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo study the dosimetric behavior of dose computational algorithms in inhomogeneous medium using CMS XiO and MONACO treatment planning system (TPS) for 4 megavoltage (MV), 6 MV and 15 MV photon beam energies. MATERIAL AND
methodsStyrofoam blocks of thickness 1.90 cm, 3.8 cm and 5.70 cm was used to introduce inhomogeneity in a slab phantom. Wipro GE computed tomography (CT) scanner was used to scan the phantom. Doses were computed on the central axis of the beam using convolution (C), superposition (S), fast superposition (FS), collapsed cone convolution (CCC) and monte carlo (MC) algorithms for field geometries of 5x5 cm2 and 10x10 cm2 for above said photon beam energies, respectively. An Ion chamber (IC) of 0.6 cc volume was used for the dose measurements. The deviation between measured and TPS computed doses were recorded.
resultsThe PDD (Percentage depth dose) data obtained from the TPS (calculated data) and LINAC (measured data) was used for comparison based on different algorithms in order to calculate the percentage of maximum deviation (PMD). The PMD in MC algorithm were calculated for field sizes of 5x5 cm2 and 10x10 cm2 are found to be in ranging from 0.73% to -4.49% for 4MV, 1.62% to -2.42% for 6MV and 4.53% to -1.47% for 15 MV for 1.90 cm air gap, 2.21% to -3.75% for 4MV, 3.87% to -2.88% for 6 MV and 4.87% to -3.46% for 15 MV for 3.80 cm air gap, 2.77% to -4.66% for 4MV, 3.87% to -2.86% for 6 MV and 5.66% to -4.92% for 15 MV for 5.70cm air gap which is less as compared to CCC, C, FS, and S algorithms.
conclusionThe comparison of C, S, FS, CCC and MC algorithms demonstrated that MC having better agreement with IC measurements. In conclusion, MC is a superior option for dose computation, particularly in the presence of low-density heterogeneities.
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.