ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2026
An end-to-end quality assurance procedure for pelvic VMAT using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters and an anthropomorphic phantom.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVolumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) enables highly conformal pelvic dose delivery, but its clinical benefit depends on agreement between the Treatment Planning System (TPS) calculation and the dose actually delivered in anatomically realistic conditions. PURPOSE: To experimentally validate VMAT dosimetric accuracy for cervical cancer using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) placed in an anthropomorphic female pelvic phantom. MATERIALS AND
methodsA female pelvic phantom was CT-scanned. A dual-arc VMAT plan was created in Eclipse (v18) using the Acuros XB algorithm with heterogeneity correction. Fifty-three OSLDs were positioned across seven pelvic slices (28-34) spanning in-field, edge, peripheral, and out-of-field regions. Measured doses were compared to TPS values using a TG-119-style percent difference metric.
resultsOverall agreement was clinically acceptable. The mean %Diff (OSL vs. TPS) was + 3.56% (range - 2.13% to + 6.93%). In-field doses showed the closest agreement (≤ 3%). Larger deviations occurred at the field edge (≈ 3.17%-6.93%), consistent with steep dose gradients. Peripheral and out-of-field locations generally remained within ~ 5%-7%, where scatter and low-dose modeling uncertainty dominate. Reproducibility was strong: SD_OSL values were < 5.2%, with mean SD of 2.63% (in-field), 4.34% (edge), 4.44% (peripheral), and 4.96% (out-of-field).
conclusionOSLD measurements in an anatomically realistic female pelvic phantom confirm that cervical cancer VMAT delivery is accurate and reproducible. These results support the reliability of Eclipse (v18) using the Acuros XB algorithm across high-dose, gradient, and low-dose regions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42635949What 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.