ArticleJournal of medical physics
Setting the Tolerance and Action Limit for Patient-specific Quality Assurance of Craniospinal Irradiation Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy: Based on AAPM TG-218 Report.
Article in Journal of medical physics. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the tolerance limits (TL) and action limits (AL) in gamma passing rate for craniospinal irradiation volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients were planned using the VMAT technique; plans were delivered on an Elekta Versa HD. The delivered fluence was recorded by PTW 2D array, and the gamma passing rate (%GP) was analyzed using PTW VeriSoft. The universal TL and AL from TG 218 were applied to analyze the %GP for each plan. As per AAPM TG 218, a statistical process control of %GP was performed to set the TL and AL. Results: The average %GP for the brain, upper spine, and lower spine was 98.4%, 98.8%, and 98.4%, respectively. The TL and AL for the brain, upper spine, and lower spine were TL: 95.1%, 95.1% and 94.8%, and AL: 89.7%, 89.3%, and 86.7%, respectively. The analysis of variance test showed that the Conclusion: AAPM TG 218 guidelines are more suitable for establishing TL and AL for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) VMAT plans. This study suggests that a single value of TL and AL for CSI plans, rather than site-specific values, could be suitable for monitoring CSI patient-specific quality assurance trends and the same can be utilized.
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.