ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
From 2D to 3D gamma passing rate tolerance and action limits for patient-specific quality assurance in volumetric-modulated arc therapy.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of IMRT patient specific quality assurance using EPID measurement data from the Halcyon linear accelerator.PloS one · 2026Article
- From 2D to 3D gamma passing rate tolerance and action limits for patient-specific quality assurance in volumetric-modulated arc therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- An Analysis of Quality Assurance for Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Treatment Plans Using Two Dosimetric Methods: The arcCHECK System and EPIbeam Based Dosimetric Approach.Journal of medical physicsArticle
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
backgroundVolumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) requires an accurate patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) program. In clinical practice, this is usually performed using the γ-index and the two-dimensional gamma passing rate (2D %GP). A three-dimensional (3D) index incorporating the patient anatomy could be more useful for the 3D dose distribution verification. PURPOSE: The current study demonstrates a thorough investigation of VMAT PSQA treatment plans by examining the correlation between 3D Gamma passing rate (%GP) and 2D %GP. The aim was to establish the tolerance limits (TL) and action limits (AL) that could be adopted in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsPSQA was performed for 67 head and neck (H&N) and 69 prostate treatment plans, using an appropriate phantom and the γ-index method. The 3%/2 mm acceptance criterion was used. Treatment plans' 2D% GP and 3D %GP values were collected and correlated with individual 3D %GP values of planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs). Institutional TL and AL of both 2D %GP and 3D %GP were established using 30 prostate and 30 H&N treatment plans, as per recommendations proposed by AAPM TG-218.
resultsA moderate correlation was observed between 2D %GP and 3D %GP of the treatment plans. Τhe correlations demonstrated a stronger association for the 3D %GP than for the 2D %GP with respect to the 3D %GP of the individual structures considered. The TL for the 3D %GP (both plan and individual) and the plans' 2D %GP were generally more stringent, while the AL showed a wider range compared to the corresponding limits suggested by the TG-218 protocol for plan 2D %GP.
conclusionsInstitution-specific 3D %GP as well as TL and AL for treatment plan, PTV and OARs could be incorporated in the PSQA procedure in synergy with the 2D evaluation, as they can provide a more-in-depth-view of the treatment quality.
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.