MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2474803827 · doi:10.1118/1.4958256

TH‐EF‐BRB‐10: Dosimetric Validation of a Trajectory Based Cranial SRS Treatment Technique On a Varian TrueBeam Linac

2016· article· en· W2474803827 on OpenAlexaff
Brock Wilson, Ermias Gete

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruebeamLinear particle acceleratorImaging phantomTrajectoryNuclear medicineRadiosurgeryRotation (mathematics)Sagittal planeDosimetryIonization chamberRadiation treatment planningBeam (structure)PhysicsComputer scienceOpticsMedicineRadiation therapyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This work investigates the dosimetric accuracy of a trajectory based delivery technique in which an optimized radiation beam is delivered along a Couch‐Gantry trajectory that is formed by simultaneous rotation of the linac gantry and the treatment couch. Methods: Nine trajectory based cranial SRS treatment plans were created using in‐house optimization software. The plans were calculated for delivery on the TrueBeam STx linac with 6MV photon beam. Dose optimization was performed along a user‐defined trajectory using MLC modulation, dose rate modulation and jaw tracking. The pre‐defined trajectory chosen for this study is formed by a couch rotation through its full range of 180 degrees while the gantry makes four partial arc sweeps which are 170 degrees each. For final dose calculation, the trajectory based plans were exported to the Varian Eclipse Treatment Planning System. The plans were calculated on a homogeneous cube phantom measuring 18.2×18.2×18.2 cm3 with the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) using a 1mm3 calculation voxel. The plans were delivered on the TrueBeam linac via the developer's mode. Point dose measurements were performed on 9 patients with the IBA CC01 mini‐chamber with a sensitive volume of 0.01 cc. Gafchromic film measurements along the sagittal and coronal planes were performed on three of the 9 treatment plans. Point dose values were compared with ion chamber measurements. Gamma analysis comparing film measurement and AAA calculations was performed using FilmQA Pro. Results: The AAA calculations and measurements were in good agreement. The point dose difference between AAA and ion chamber measurements were within 2.2%. Gamma analysis test pass rates (2%, 2mm passing criteria) for the Gafchromic film measurements were >95%. Conclusion: We have successfully tested TrueBeam's ability to deliver accurate trajectory based treatments involving simultaneous gantry and couch rotation with MLC and dose rate modulation along the trajectory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→