Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40170430›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2025

Verification of dose and dose rate for quality assurance of spread-out-Bragg-peak proton FLASH radiotherapy using machine log files.

Seyyedeh Azar Oliaei Motlagh, François Vander Stappen, Michele M Kim, Rudi Labarbe, Lucian Hotoiu, Arnaud Pin, Rasmus Nilsson, Erik Traneus, Keith A Cengel, Wei Zou and 3 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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Deliverable proton conformal FLASH radiotherapy treatment planning for head and neck re-irradiation patients.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

13 authors.

Seyyedeh Azar Oliaei MotlaghDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
François Vander StappenIon Beam Applications S.A, (IBA), Luvain-la-Neueve, Belgium.
Michele M KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Rudi LabarbeIon Beam Applications S.A, (IBA), Luvain-la-Neueve, Belgium.
Lucian HotoiuIon Beam Applications S.A, (IBA), Luvain-la-Neueve, Belgium.
Arnaud PinIon Beam Applications S.A, (IBA), Luvain-la-Neueve, Belgium.
Rasmus NilssonRaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Erik TraneusRaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Keith A CengelDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Wei ZouDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Boon-Keng Kevin TeoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Lei DongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Eric S DiffenderferDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Funding

Translational Studies in FLASH Particle RadiotherapyP01CA257904 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Mary E. Putt · 2022 to 2026
$14.2M
Ion Beam Applications (IBA) Proton Therapy and National Institutes of Health (NIH) P01CA257904NCI NIH HHS P01 CA257904
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUltra-high dose rate radiotherapy elicits a biological effect (FLASH), which has been shown to reduce toxicity while maintaining tumor control in preclinical radiobiology experiments. FLASH depends on the dose rate, with evidence that higher dose rates drive increased normal tissue sparing. The pattern of dose delivery also has significance for conformal proton FLASH delivered via pencil beam scanning (PBS) given its unique spatio-temporal distribution of dose deposition. PURPOSE: In PBS, the machine-generated log file contains information on the spatio-temporal pattern of PBS delivery measured by the segmented ionization chambers in the treatment nozzle. The spot position and monitor unit (MU) obtained from log files have previously been used to reconstruct the treatment dose by Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. The incorporation of spot timing allows reconstruction of the 3D temporal dose distribution. The log-based dose and dose rate can have a role in quality assurance (QA) and FLASH treatment verification if the reconstruction can be shown to be accurate in spatial and temporal domains of dose deposition. Thus, the objective of this study is to validate the accuracy of dose rate reconstruction using input data from machine log files of PBS delivery. By analyzing the delivered spot timing, position, and MU extracted from the logs, we aim to evaluate the reliability and precision of the log data for dose and dose rate reconstruction.

methodsFLASH PBS spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) treatment fields were delivered using a cyclotron accelerated proton beam. This method involves a patient and field-specific conformal energy modulator (CEM) to achieve a SOBP at the tumor site. Log files record spot positions and the delivered MU with timing information at 250 µs resolution. To validate timing information, a 9.9 mm diameter parallel plate ionization chamber was positioned at various locations within the SOBP. An electrometer sampling at 20 kHz recorded the time-resolved ionization current collected by the ionization chamber. These measurements were used to determine spot dose, dose rate, duration, and transition times. Disparities between the measured and logged spot map MU and timing were determined. Dose average and PBS dose rates were compared between the measurement and log-based MC simulations.

resultsThere was a good agreement between the measured dwell time and transition time and the logged information across various detector positions. The median disparities for inter-spot dwell time range from -0.041  to 0.024 ms. Differences between logged and planned spot positions are minimal, measuring less than 1.08 mm in the x direction and 1.15 mm in the y direction, consistent with prior studies and the spatial resolution of the PBS nozzle ionization chamber. Delivered MU were within 1.9% of the planned MU. Measured dose and dose rates are consistent with simulated outcomes derived from MC simulation.

conclusionWe validated the precision and accuracy of PBS log file data through measurements and MC simulations. These findings support the use of log files in MC calculations as one part of patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) and dose rate delivery verification for conformal proton FLASH radiotherapy with SOBP.

Indexed as

Proton TherapyQuality Assurance, Health CareRadiation DosageHumansMonte Carlo MethodQuality ControlRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assistedconformalflashlog filemonte carloprotonQA

Identifiers

PMID40170430
PMCPMC12149695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.