MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408572860 · doi:10.1002/acm2.70081

Evaluation of dosimetric and spatial accuracy of a virtual cone technique for radiosurgery using linac‐integrated CBCT‐based polymer gel dosimetry

2025· article· en· W4408572860 on OpenAlexaff
Tenzin Kunkyab, M Lamey, Andrew Jirasek, Michael Kudla, Nathan Becker, Benjamin Mou, Derek Hyde

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomDosimetryNuclear medicineCone beam computed tomographySagittal planeRadiosurgeryCollimatorRadiation treatment planningMaterials sciencePhysicsOpticsRadiation therapyMedicineComputed tomographyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the dosimetric and geometric precision of a virtual cone technique using CBCT-based polymer gel dosimetry, enabling radiation delivery, and imaging readout within an identical spatial coordinate system. METHODS: We created a C# script for a virtual cone technique that generates a treatment plan with 10 gantry arcs at 0°, 36°, 72°, 288°, and 324° couch angles, with 2 arcs per couch angle using 45° and 135° collimator angles. Two verification plans using Eclipse v15.6 (AcurosXB) were created with 20 Gy at the maximum dose for: (1) a cylindrical gel, with an additional calibration region; (2) a 3D printed anthropomorphic skull phantom with a gel insert. The 50% isodose (10 Gy) width through the central axis of the axial and sagittal planes (SPs) were measured for the gel experiment. The distance between the centers-of-masses of the 10 Gy isodose region of the plan and the gel (skull phantom) were calculated for an end-to-end spatial accuracy test. RESULTS: 0.01 mm for axial (anterior-posterior), axial (left-right), sagittal (superior-inferior) respectively, which were slightly narrower than Eclipse (1.29 mm maximum difference in the SP due to CBCT slice thickness). The center-of-mass distance was 0.66 mm for the gel experiment, and 0.94 mm for complete end-to-end testing with the anthropomorphic phantom, including CBCT setup (kV-MV isocenter uncertainty). CONCLUSION: The 50% isodose width of the gel measurement was 5.15 mm (mean), which was tighter than our Eclipse v15.6 beam model. The end-to-end spatial accuracy test, only achievable with gel dosimetry using CBCT readout, resulted in sub-millimeter accuracy. This study demonstrates the value of gel dosimetry in verifying the dosimetric and spatial accuracy of this high precision, stereotactic technique.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.360 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207