ArticleJournal of medical physics
Retrospective Comparative Study on Dose Gradients and Peripheral Dose Management in Advanced Radiotherapy Systems.
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
Background and Purpose: This study aimed to compare dose gradients and peripheral dose spillage across three advanced radiotherapy modalities: C-Arm Linac (TrueBeam STx), Ring Gantry (Radixact Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 110 patients with multi-lesion brain tumors treated with stereotactic radiotherapy was conducted. Patients were grouped by target volume size, and treatment plans were created using the three modalities. Dosimetric parameters, including gradient index (GI5-GI50), dose conformity, and homogeneity, were analyzed following ICRU 91 guidelines. Phantom verification using the Rando Phantom and PTW SRS1600 detector ensured clinical reliability. Results: The Robotic Arm Linac demonstrated the steepest dose gradients and lowest GI values at GI10 and GI5, highlighting superior precision and minimal low-dose spillage ( Conclusion: Robotic Arm Linac is optimal for precise treatments with stringent organ-at-risk sparing, while C-Arm Linac and ring gantry are better suited for broader dose coverage in complex cases. These results provide guidance for modality selection based on tumor size and clinical needs, with potential for further optimization through artificial intelligence and advanced planning tools.
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.