Experimental measurements and Monte Carlo simulations for dosimetric evaluations of intrafraction motion for gated and ungated intensity modulated arc therapy deliveries
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Respiratory gated radiation therapy allows for a smaller margin expansion for the planning target volume (PTV) to account for respiratory induced motion and is emerging as a common method to treat lung and liver tumors. We investigated the dosimetric effect of free motion and gated delivery for intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) with experimental measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. The impact of PTV margin and duty cycle for gated delivery is studied with Monte Carlo simulations. A motion phantom is used for this study. Two sets of contours were drawn on the mid-inspiration CT scan of this motion phantom. For each set of contours, an IMAT plan to be delivered with constant dose rate was created. The plans were generated on a CT scan of the phantom in the static condition with 3 mm PTV margin and applied to the motion phantom under four conditions: static, full superior-inferior (SI) motion (A = 1 cm, T = 4 s) and gating conditions (25% and 50% duty cycles) with full SI motion. A 6 by 15 cm piece of radiographic film was placed in the sagittal plane of the phantom and then irradiated under all measurement conditions. Film calibration was performed with a step-wedge method to convert optical density to dose. Gated IMAT delivery was first validated in 2D by comparing static film with that from gating and full motion. A previously verified simulation tool for IMRT that takes the log files from the multileaf collimator (MLC) controller and the gating system were adapted to simulate the delivered IMAT treatment for full 3D dosimetric analysis. The IMAT simulations were validated against the 2D film measurements. The resultant IMAT simulations were evaluated with dose criteria, dose-volume histograms and 3D gamma analysis. We validated gated IMAT deliveries when we compared the static film with the one from gating using 25% duty cycle using 2D gamma analysis. Within experimental and setup uncertainties, film measurements agreed with their corresponding simulated plans using 2D gamma analysis. Finally, when planning with margins designed for gating with 25% duty cycle and applying 50% or no gating during treatment, the dose differences in D(min,) D(99%) and D(95%) of the clinical target volume can be up to 27 cGy, 20 cGy and 18 cGy, respectively, for a plan with 200 cGy prescription dose. We have experimentally delivered gated IMAT with constant dose rate to a motion phantom and assessed their accuracies with film dosimetry and Monte Carlo simulations. Film dosimetry demonstrated that 25% gating and static plans are within 2%, 2 mm. The Monte Carlo simulation method was employed to generate dose delivered in 3D to a motion phantom, and the dosimetric results were reported. Since our film measurements agreed well with Monte Carlo simulations, we can reliably use this simulation tool to further study the dosimetric effects of target motion and effectiveness of gating for IMAT deliveries.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».