ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Dosimetric characterization of a Varex VF-80/μXHP x-ray unit using open-ended applicators for superficial radiotherapy.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dosimetric characterization of a Varex VF-80/μXHP x-ray unit using open-ended applicators for superficial radiotherapy.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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundKilovoltage x-ray units (50-150 kVp) are widely used for skin cancer treatments, necessitating precise dosimetric characterization to ensure accurate dose delivery. This study validates the depth dose data of the VF-80/𝜇XHP (80 kV, 100 W) x-ray system for use in low-kV therapy with a contemporary detector.
objectiveThis research aims to characterize the kilovoltage VF-80/𝜇XHP x-ray unit with open-ended PMMA and stainless-steel applicators of various diameters by utilizing different x-ray energy values.
methodsMeasurements included machine output reproducibility, applicator leakage and thickness effects, measurement of HVL, reference output dosimetry, and applicator-to-phantom spacing. PDD curves were obtained using various filter/kV and applicator combinations with a PTW 34013 parallel-plate ionization chamber in a solid water phantom and through MC simulations with the TOPAS Monte Carlo code in a water phantom, which were validated against literature data.
resultsThe study evaluated around 40 x-ray beams. The PDDs were measured in a solid water phantom using a PTW 34013 ionization chamber and calculated with the TOPAS Monte Carlo code. Both the measured and computed percent depth dose data were compared to the BJR 25 supplementary. The agreement between ionization chamber measurements and MC calculations with BJR 25 supplementary was within [1.9%, 1.5%] for 50 kV x-rays and within [0.5%, 0.2%] for 70 kV x-rays.
conclusionThis research provides the dosimetric analysis of a kilovoltage VF-80/μXHP x-ray machine. The primary focus was on using a PTW 34013 ionization chamber to measure the percentage depth dose in a solid water phantom, along with dose calculations performed using the TOPAS Monte Carlo simulation. The findings align well with existing literature, confirming that this x-ray unit is suitable for low-kV x-ray radiotherapy applications.
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.