Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42855891›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026

Verifying calculated dose to the breast in stereotactic radiotherapy: A practical phantom-based method.

Stewart J Becker, Ryan E Smith, Wesley S Culberson, Kurt E Stump, Baoshe Zhang, Jie Ding, Sina Mossahebi, Dennis Herschbach, Elizabeth M Nichols

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Stewart J BeckerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2834-8087
Ryan E SmithOffice of Research and Development, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Wesley S CulbersonDepartment of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4573-4406
Kurt E StumpDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mission Cancer Center, Asheville, North Carolina, USA.
Baoshe ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1605-070X
Jie DingDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1676-7778
Sina MossahebiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Dennis HerschbachDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7514-7697
Elizabeth M NicholsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReference dosimetry for the GammaPod breast radiosurgery device is determined in a polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) phantom, while the clinical dose calculations assume the patient's breast has the atomic composition of water with a density (∼0.935 g/cm PURPOSE: This study aimed to validate the GammaPod TPS dose calculations by 3D printing a breast-equivalent phantom and to develop a practical and reproducible method for end-to-end testing and PSQA.

methodsMultiple breast-shaped phantoms matching the L02 GammaPod cup geometry were fabricated; three using 3D printing and one using clear ice. The 3D-printed phantoms were constructed from polylactic acid (PLA) and premium PLA (PLApro) using optimized infill densities to achieve a physical density near 0.935 g/cm

resultsThe breast-tissue mimicking phantoms yielded mean Hounsfield (HU) and Stopping Power Ratios (SPR) numbers of -81 HU ± 5 and 0.99 SPR for blue PLApro (92.5%), -69 HU ± 11 and 0.99 SPR for natural PLA (86.0%), -82 HU ± 5 and 1.00 SPR for the ice phantom corresponding to densities of 0.916 g/cm

conclusionThe GammaPod TPS accurately predicts dose in breast-equivalent materials. The 3D-printed breast phantom provides a reliable, water-composition breast-density material, and geometrically accurate tool for end-to-end testing and PSQA, eliminating the challenges associated with water measurements. This method supports routine clinical verification and offers a reproducible framework for ongoing GammaPod QA and commissioning.

Indexed as

BreastBreast NeoplasmsPhantoms, ImagingPrinting, Three-DimensionalQuality Assurance, Health CareRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansOrgans at RiskPolymethyl MethacrylateRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedTomography, X-Ray ComputedPolymethyl Methacrylate3D PrintingbreastGammaPodquality assuranceSRSvalidation

Identifiers

PMID42855891
PMCPMC13653073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.