ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Classification performances of two diode arrays for patient-specific quality assurance of stereotactic body radiation therapy treatments based on absolute dose measurements in phantom.
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.
- Assessing Gamma Index Sensitivity to Selected Linear Accelerator Mechanical Errors Using Various Dosimetric Systems.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a merging-based approach for improving patient-specific quality assurance in proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy: a comparative study with conventional single-isocentre experience.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Article
- Classification performances of two diode arrays for patient-specific quality assurance of stereotactic body radiation therapy treatments based on absolute dose measurements in phantom.Journal of applied clinical 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the rapid growth in the clinical practice, no specific recommendations on pre-treatment patient-specific quality assurance of volumetric modulated arc therapy-based stereotactic body radiation therapy plans have been established. PURPOSE: In this contest, the study aims to identify optimal gamma analysis criteria and thresholds for the Sun Nuclear ArcCHECK and SRS MapCHECK arrays.
methodsTwenty SBRT plans were delivered on both devices per plan and field-by-field. The measurements were compared with calculations and Gamma Passing Rates (GPRs), obtained using global normalization in absolute dose and 10% threshold, with six different Dose Difference (DD) / Distance To Agreement (DTA) criteria stricter than those universally suggested by the Report of the AAPM Task Group No. 218, were recorded. Receiver Operating Characteristics analysis was performed on GPRs while varying the threshold from 0% to 100%, the agreement between calculations and absolute dose measurements, obtained with a IBA Razor chamber at the isocenter in phantom at different levels (i.e., 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, and 5%), being the Ground Truth. Significance of the resulting Areas Under Curve (AUCs) against the random guess was tested.
resultsAUCs obtained with ArcCHECK are generally more significant than with SRS MapCHECK, while those measured field-by-field are more significant than per plan. Within the considered DD/DTA criteria, the most discriminative ones are device-specific, that is, 2%/2 mm or 1%/2 mm for ArcCHECK and 2%/1 mm or 1%/1 mm for SRS MapCHECK.
conclusionsOur results on ArcCHECK confirm the indication of the AAPM Task Group No. 218, while for SRS MapCHECK, acceptable discriminating capabilities are possible with DTA = 1 mm, suggesting that devices with native higher spatial resolution, preferred in SBRT for the better sampling of the dose distribution, require tighter DTA.
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.