Effective spatially fractionated GRID radiation treatment planning for a passive grid block
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To commission a grid block for spatially fractionated grid radiation therapy (SFGRT) treatments and describe its clinical implementation and verification through the record and verify (R&V) system. METHODS: SFGRT was developed as a treatment modality for bulky tumours that cannot be easily controlled with conventionally fractionated radiation. Treatment is delivered in the form of open-closed areas. Currently, SFGRT is performed by either using a commercially available grid block or a multileaf collimator (MLC) of a linear accelerator. In this work, 6-MV photon beam was used to study dosimetric characteristics of the grid block. We inserted the grid block into a commercially available treatment planning system (TPS), and the feasibility of delivering such treatment plans on a linear accelerator using a R&V system was verified. Dose measurements were performed using a miniature PinPoint(TM) ion chamber (PTW, Freiburg, Germany) in a water phantom and radiochromic film within solid water slabs. PinPoint ion chamber was used to measure the output factors, percentage depth dose (PDD) curves and beam profiles at two depths, depth of maximum dose (zmax) and 10 cm. Film sheets were used to measure dose profiles at zmax and 10-cm depth. RESULTS: The largest observed percentage difference between output factors for the grid block technique calculated by the TPS and measured with the PinPoint ion chamber was 3.6% for the 5 × 5-cm(2) field size. Relatively significant discrepancies between measured and calculated PDD values appear only in the build-up region, which was found to amount to <4%, while a good agreement (differences <2%) at depths beyond zmax was observed. Dose verification comparisons performed between calculated and measured dose distributions were in clinically acceptable agreements. When comparing the MLC-based with the grid block technique, the advantage of treating large tumours with a single field reduces treatment time by at least 3-5 times, having significant impact on patient throughput. CONCLUSION: The proposed method supports and helps to standardize the clinical implementation of the grid block in a safer and more accurate way. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This work describes the method to implement treatment planning for the grid block technique in radiotherapy departments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".