ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2026
Dosimetric applicator characterization in hyperthermia: an automated quality assurance procedure based on relative specific absorption rate measurements.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEnsuring reproducible treatments and therapeutic temperature rises is pivotal for wider clinical application of hyperthermia. We propose a fast automated quality assurance (QA) procedure using E‑field measurements for relative specific absorption rate (SAR) applicator characterization, with a similar workflow to radiotherapy dosimetry.
methodsOur procedure was demonstrated for 434 MHz superficial contact flexible microstrip applicators (CFMA) with similar antennas and geometry to the ALBA ON 4000D system. Applicators were placed on a liquid saline phantom. A Cartesian robot performed E‑field measurements moving E‑field sensors through the phantom. We analysed the influence of spatial resolution on effective field size (EFS) measurements. Using volume measurements, we established effective penetration depth (EPD) variation across the aperture. We evaluated repeatability, measuring central planes on eight different days. Applicators/phantoms were characterized with flat and curved setups, using standard clinical and more excessive bolus thicknesses.
resultsProcedures take ~40 min per setup condition. One-centimetre spatial resolution appears sufficient for QA. EPD showed errors < 5% when determined from high-SAR regions (~80-90% of the maximum). The EFS and EPD variability between different days was < 5%. Increasing EPD and decreasing EFS with increasing curvature was observed when using the clinical bolus thickness, with more homogeneous SAR distributions for curved than for flat setups. Excessive bolus thickness resulted in irregular SAR distributions and larger EFS and EPD variations.
conclusionThe proposed QA procedure is characterized by fast, practical and reproducible measurements that are suitable for efficiently evaluating various setup conditions. This flexible workflow can also be used with other radiative hyperthermia systems.
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.