ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2025
A comprehensive investigation of the radiation isocentre spatial variability in linear accelerators: implications for commissioning, QA, and clinical protocols.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are modern high precision techniques used for cancer management. Hence, evaluating potential clinical impacts of mischaracterisation of the radiation isocentre (RI) variability at different gantry and collimator angles during commissioning and quality assurance (QA) helps to ensure the robustness of treatment delivery and successful outcomes. This was done using signal edge detection techniques on flattened and flattening filter free (FFF) fields generated by megavoltage (MV) treatment beams. A total of 22,815 MV images of 4 × 16 cm2, were captured using an iViewGT™ Perkin Elmer a-Si Electronic Portal Imaging Device at 13 different gantry angles, paired with 13 collimator angles each in 30° intervals. 6 MV, 6 MV FFF, and 18 MV photon treatment modes were used across 8 linacs. The Starshot images were subsequently analysed using custom in-house signal detection software developed in Python. The mean RI variabilities across the entire treatment arc were approximately 0.58 mm, 0.66 mm, and 0.58 mm, for beam energies of 6 MV, 6 MV FFF, and 18 MV respectively, with corresponding standard deviations of 0.18 mm, 0.21 mm, and 0.19 mm, with maximum variabilities occurring at 300°, 0°, and 240° of magnitudes 0.62 mm, 0.71 mm, and 0.62 mm, respectively. Correspondingly, the standard deviations were 0.20 mm, 0.23 mm, and 0.17 mm. The resulting RI variabilities, applied to SRS QA parameters, may breach the 1 mm tolerance. In some clinical scenarios, this may impact treatment plan acceptance with treatment coverage goals outside of acceptable limits. We recommend enhancing commissioning and QA protocols by combining Starshot and Winston–Lutz-style tests to assess the positional deviation of the apparent radiation isocentre from the mechanical isocentre, and the radiation isocentre’s maximal variability across a larger range of intermediate angles. This approach helps define reference angles and tailor QA frequency based on individual linac behaviour.
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.