ArticleMedical physics2025
Comparison of secondary radiation dose between pencil beam scanning and scattered delivery for proton and VHEE radiotherapy.
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 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.
- Factors Influencing the Biological Effects of FLASH Irradiation.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Comparison of secondary radiation dose between pencil beam scanning and scattered delivery for proton and VHEE radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVery high-energy electrons (VHEEs) in radiotherapy may offer several potential advantages over conventional electron beams and other techniques, for example, the fact that they can be used at ultra-high dose rates (UHDRs), therefore enabling FLASH radiotherapy. However, the production of secondary particles at high energies (50-200 MeV) has yet to be studied in detail for this technique currently under development. PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to examine the secondary dose produced by VHEEs, with particular emphasis on bremsstrahlung photons and neutrons, for two beam delivery systems (double scattering [DS] and pencil beam scanning [PBS]).
methodsThe electron, X-ray, and neutron doses arising from two beam delivery systems (DS or PBS) were computed using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations in the TOPAS (TOol for PArticle Simulation)/Geant4 toolkit, and a preliminary assessment of the secondary dose for a clinical VHEE treatment was performed using a whole-body phantom. An evaluation of the secondary dose produced by this preliminary design of a VHEE nozzle set in a clinical proton facility was performed, taking into account realistic PBS or DS nozzle configurations.
resultsThe mean doses received by a patient undergoing DS-VHEE irradiation were found to be up to 5.3-fold and 6.8-fold higher for in-field or out-of-field organs for photons and neutrons, respectively, compared to the PBS-VHEE plan. The results for the secondary neutron dose in intracranial treatments also demonstrate the characteristic of VHEE compared to proton beams for reducing the out-of-field secondary neutron dose. The dose to the public area that could be delivered to meet regulatory limits surrounding a possible treatment room in a proton therapy facility was assessed. A regulatory limit of 0.5 µSv/h would give a restriction of 49 and 83 Gy per patient and per fraction for DS and PBS, respectively.
conclusionsThis work describes a method to simulate and compare secondary radiation doses resulting from scattered, scanned VHEE or proton therapy treatments. The results indicate that a conventionally shielded proton therapy room results in acceptable public doses for a preliminary VHEE design and could be of interest for radiation protection purposes and for similar setups. Other facilities with differing layouts may, however, lead to different conclusions, requiring further studies.
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.