MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976927589 · doi:10.1118/1.3549766

Real‐time verification of multileaf collimator‐driven radiotherapy using a novel optical attenuation‐based fluence monitor

2011· article· en· W1976927589 on OpenAlexafffund
Mathieu Goulet, L Gingras, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de Québec
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec
KeywordsMultileaf collimatorCollimatorAttenuationOpticsIntensity modulationDosimetryOptical fiberDosimeterIonization chamberPhysicsRadiation therapyDetectorFluenceCollimated lightNuclear medicineBeam (structure)Linear particle acceleratorRadiationMedicineLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Multileaf collimator (MLC)-driven conformal radiotherapy modalities [e.g., such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), intensity-modulated arc therapy, and stereotactic body radiotherapy] are more subject to delivery errors and dose calculation inaccuracies than standard modalities. Fluence monitoring during treatment delivery could reduce such errors by allowing an independent interface to quantify and assess measured difference between the delivered and planned treatment administration. We developed an optical attenuation-based detector to monitor fluence for the on-line quality control of radiotherapy delivery. The purpose of the current study was to develop the theoretical background of the invention and to evaluate the detector's performance both statistically and in clinical situations. METHODS: We aligned 60 27-cm scintillating fibers coupled to a photodetector via clear optical fibers in the direction of motion of each of the 60 leaf pairs of a 120 leaves Millenium MLC on a Varian Clinac iX. We developed a theoretical model to predict the intensity of light collected on each side of the scintillating fibers when placed under radiation fields of varying sizes, intensities, and positions. The model showed that both the central position of the radiation field on the fiber (x(c)) and the integral fluence passing through the fiber (phi(int)) could be assessed independently in a single measurement. We evaluated the performance of the prototype by (1) measuring the intrinsic variation of the measured values of x(c) and phi(int), (2) measuring the impact on the measured values of x(c) and phi(int) of random leaf positioning errors introduced into IMRT fields, and (3) comparing the predicted values of x(c) and phi(int) calculated with the treatment planning software to the measured values of x(c) and phi(int) in order to assess the predictive effectiveness of the developed theoretical model. RESULTS: We observed a very low intrinsic dispersion, dominated by Poisson statistics, for both x(c) (standard deviations of less than 1 mm) and phi(int) (standard deviations of less than 0.20%). When confronted with random leaf positioning errors from IMRT segments, phi(int) was highly sensitive to single leaf positioning errors as small as 1 mm at isocenter, while x(c) was sensitive to leaf pair translation errors of at least 2 mm at isocenter. Owing to the uncertainties in the doses calculated in regions of high perpendicular dose gradients, the measured values of x(c) and phi(int) deviated from the predicted values of x(c) and phi(int) by a mean of 1.3 mm and 2.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that an optical attenuation-based detector can be used to effectively monitor integral fluence during radiotherapy delivery. The performance of such a system would enable real-time quality control of the incident fluence in current MLC-driven treatments such as IMRT and future adaptive radiotherapy procedures where new treatment plans will have to be delivered without passing thru the current standard quality control chain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207