ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Quality assurance of online adaptive radiotherapy workflows using film dosimetry in a 3D printed thorax anthropomorphic phantom.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From local validation to global standardization of three-dimensional printing in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Quality Assurance for online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) can be challenging. Several tests can demonstrate the dosimetric and position accuracy, but commercial phantoms are often not anatomically representative. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography guided oART palliative and breast cancer trials by using a 3D printed thorax anthropomorphic phantom. Materials and methods: An anthropomorphic phantom was 3D printed for this study which accommodates film through the spine, breast, heart, and lungs. Dose was measured for spine and breast treatment plans, whilst variations were simulated which can occur during treatment. Measurements were compared to calculated dose on the planning (pCT) and synthetic computed tomography (sCT) using gamma pass rate criteria of minimal 95 % (for gamma of 4 %/2 mm). Differences between the mean gamma were tested for significance. Results: Measurements done with positional and target volume changes showed no significant difference between the gamma analyses for the pCT and sCT (p = 0.15), indicating a robust and safe workflow. For extreme variations, difference was found between gamma analyses for the pCT and sCT (p = 0.051). Pass rates were all >95 %, except for three measurements in which the sCT showed density errors up to 1000 Hounsfield Units. Conclusions: This QA approach for oART, which used film measurements in a custom 3D-printed anthropomorphic phantom was able to validate the accuracy of the oART workflow when anatomical deviations arise and could be suitable as end-to-end test in the future.
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.