ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Real-time motion tracking of a gold implant in water by Cherenkov lights.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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
backgroundThe intra-fraction motion of tumors during radiation therapy can be monitored using imaging systems based on X-ray imaging (e.g., kV/MV radiography or CBCT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, these techniques have limitations, including additional ionizing radiation dose and the need for complex, expensive equipment. Hence, a non-invasive, lower-cost motion-tracking approach that does not add radiation would be beneficial for routine clinical applications. PURPOSE: To study the feasibility of tracking the dynamic motion of a small gold marker in water by using Cherenkov photons produced by MV photon beams, through Monte Carlo simulations and experiments.
methodsThe GAMOS Monte Carlo code, which includes an optical simulation module, was used to calculate the deposited dose and Cherenkov-light yield in a water phantom. Phase-space files for 6, 10, 15, and 10 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) beams served as photon sources. The simulation setup consisted of a 20 × 20 × 20 cm
resultsMonte Carlo simulations showed that Cherenkov light yield throughout the phantom closely correlated with the PDD for all beam energies. The Cherenkov light yield upstream of the gold implant increased by 6.12%, 7.16%, 9.11%, and 7.01% compared to the Cherenkov light yield without the gold implant for 6, 10 FFF, 10, and 15 MV beams, respectively. Experiments confirmed that the beam-facing side of the gold implant appeared brighter than the opposite side, indicating enhanced backscattered electron production. Cherenkov-based positional measurements of the periodically moving implant showed close agreement with bright-room references. For static beams, accuracy across motion patterns was < 0.70 mm with repeatability < 0.2 mm. For the VMAT plan, the accuracies were < 0.50 mm (Arc A) and < 0.70 mm (Arc B).
conclusionThe Cherenkov-light yield was strongly correlated with the deposited dose and showed a notable enhancement around the gold implant. Cherenkov light imaging successfully tracked the dynamic motion of a gold implant in water under high-dose rate conditions, demonstrating its potential for real-time fiducial tracking in radiation therapy without additional radiation exposure.
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.