Cobalt-60 tomotherapy: Clinical treatment planning and phantom dose delivery studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Investigations have shown that a Cobalt-60 (Co-60) radioactive source has the potential to play a role in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). In this paper, Co-60 tomotherapy's conformal dose delivery potential is evaluated by delivering conformal dose plans on a cylindrical homogeneous phantom containing clinical structures similar to those found in a typical head and neck (H&N) cancer. Also, the clinical potential of Co-60 tomotherapy is investigated by generating 2D clinical treatment plans for H&N and prostate anatomical regions. These plans are compared with the 6 MV based treatment plans for modalities such as linear accelerator-based tomotherapy and broad beam IMRT, and 15 MV based 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT). METHODS: For experimental validation studies, clinical and nonclinical conformal dose patterns were delivered on circular, homogeneous phantoms containing GafChromic film. For clinical planning study, dose calculations were performed with the EGSnrc Monte Carlo program, where a Theratronics 780C Co-60 unit and a 6 MV linear accelerator were modeled with a MIMiC binary multileaf collimator. An inhouse inverse treatment planning system was used to optimize tomotherapy plans using the same optimization parameters for both Co-60 and 6 MV beams. The IMRT and 3DCRT plans for the clinical cases were generated entirely in the Eclipse treatment planning system based on inhouse IMRT and 3DCRT site specific protocols. RESULTS: The doses delivered to the homogeneous phantoms agreed with the calculations, indicating that it is possible to deliver highly conformal doses with the Co-60 unit. The dose distributions for Co-60 tomotherapy clinical plans for both clinical cases were similar to those obtained with 6 MV based tomotherapy and IMRT, and much more conformal compared to 3DCRT plans. The dose area histograms showed that the Co-60 plans achieve the dose objectives for the targets and organs at risk. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that Co-60 tomotherapy is capable of providing state-of-the-art conformal dose delivery and could be used for the treatment of targets in both small and larger separation anatomical regions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".