Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40143574›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2025

Accuracy of a helium-beam radiography system based on thin pixel detectors for an anthropomorphic head phantom.

Margareta Metzner, Friderike K Longarino, Benjamin Ackermann, Annika Schlechter, Maike Saphörster, Yanting Xu, Julian Schlecker, Patrick Wohlfahrt, Christian Richter, Stephan Brons and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Margareta MetznerHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Friderike K LongarinoHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Benjamin AckermannHeidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Annika SchlechterHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Maike SaphörsterHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Yanting XuHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Julian SchleckerHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Patrick WohlfahrtOncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universitat Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Christian RichterOncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universitat Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Stephan BronsHeidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Jürgen DebusHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Oliver JäkelHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Mária MartišíkováHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.
Tim GehrkeHeidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO) and National Center for Research in Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 426970603Wolfgang Gentner Programme of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research 13E18CHA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIon-beam radiography is a promising technique to verify the range of ion-beam radiotherapy treatments regularly. To detect and quantify the water-equivalent thickness (WET) of potential anatomical changes, ion-beam radiographs must provide a sufficient WET accuracy on the level of 1%. PURPOSE: In this work, we show an energy-painted helium-beam radiograph of an anthropomorphic head phantom acquired with thin silicon pixel detectors for the first time. Furthermore, we determine the WET accuracy of our helium-beam radiography system for the especially heterogeneous skull base region, which is highly relevant for the treatment of head and neck and skull base tumors.

methodsWith a detection system based on pixelated semiconducting Timepix detectors, we track single ions upstream and downstream of the head phantom. Furthermore, we measure their energy deposition in a thin Timepix detector behind the anthropomorphic phantom. To ensure a high precision of the image, we acquired a radiograph by using helium beams with five initial energies between 146.84 and 188.07 MeV/u following the energy painting algorithm. With a Siemens SOMATOM Confidence CT scanner, a single- and dual-energy CT were acquired with clinical protocols and translated to relative stopping power (RSP) values. After projecting these scans, the resulting WET maps were compared to the helium-beam radiograph. To evaluate the accuracy of all three modalities, a reference data set based on range-pullback measurements and a segmentation of a high-resolution CT scan was taken into account.

resultsThe mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of all modalities was determined to be between 0.95% and 1.16%. Also, the root-mean-square percentage error (RMSPE) was similar for all modalities ranging from 1.19% to 1.46%. These deviations from the reference scan were found to mainly stem from an overestimation of air and sinus tissue and underestimation of cortical bone.

conclusionsThe helium-beam radiograph was shown to achieve a WET accuracy competitive with that of clinically used imaging methods. If certain technical aspects are addressed, helium-beam radiography may emerge as an auspicious imaging modality for on-couch range verification of ion-beam radiotherapy treatments allowing for regular detection and quantification of anatomical changes.

Indexed as

HeadHeliumPhantoms, ImagingRadiographyHumansTomography, X-Ray ComputedHeliumion‐beam imagingproton therapytimepix detectors

Identifiers

PMID40143574
PMCPMC12149684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.