Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) · 2025
Working thresholds for in-vivo dosimetry in EPIGray based on a clinical, anatomically-stratified study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Williamson Puente Sandra, Cámara Gallego Miguel, Sevillano Martínez David, Colmenares Fernández Rafael, García Fuentes Juan David, Capuz Suárez Ana Belén, Morís Pablos Rafael, Béjar Navarro María José, Prieto Morán Daniel, Galiano Fernández Pablo, Chillida Rey Rubén, Rodríguez-Manzaneque Sosa Carlos, García-Vicente Feliciano
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To obtain tolerance levels for working with the EPID-based EPIgray in vivo dosimetry system.
METHODS: Dose differences between planned and delivered treatments in various anatomical areas, including the gastro-intestinal, urological, rectum and anal canal, gynecological, breast, head and neck, and lung regions, were analyzed across 5,791 fractions. Whether or not the dose differences at each location are symmetrical with respect to zero and adhere to a normal distribution is then checked. Linear regression analysis was applied to check for temporal drift in lung and head and neck treatments. A water equivalent phantom and another with a water-polystyrene interface is used to estimate the dose difference intrinsic to the measurement system. Furthermore, appropriate dose distribution in two treatments is verified using radiochoromic film.
RESULTS: Normal distribution was not observed in any region, and only two showed symmetry around zero. The mean dose differences were: (0.33 ± 6.32) % for the gastro-intestinal system, (-1.31 ± 3.16) % for the gynaecological area, (0.79 ± 4.55) % for VMAT-breast, (3.48 ± 4.00) % for 3DCRT-breast, (0.70 ± 3.20) % for head and neck, (5.63 ± 5.48)% for lung, (-1.36 ± 2.98) % for rectum and anal canal, and (0.13 ± 3.53) % for the urological system.
CONCLUSION: EPIgray should support tolerance levels asymmetric with respect to zero, given the positive deviation observed in mean dose for lung, breast, and head and neck regions. Additionally, the system's ability to detect dose variations during treatment could help identify changes in tumor volume.
METHODS: Dose differences between planned and delivered treatments in various anatomical areas, including the gastro-intestinal, urological, rectum and anal canal, gynecological, breast, head and neck, and lung regions, were analyzed across 5,791 fractions. Whether or not the dose differences at each location are symmetrical with respect to zero and adhere to a normal distribution is then checked. Linear regression analysis was applied to check for temporal drift in lung and head and neck treatments. A water equivalent phantom and another with a water-polystyrene interface is used to estimate the dose difference intrinsic to the measurement system. Furthermore, appropriate dose distribution in two treatments is verified using radiochoromic film.
RESULTS: Normal distribution was not observed in any region, and only two showed symmetry around zero. The mean dose differences were: (0.33 ± 6.32) % for the gastro-intestinal system, (-1.31 ± 3.16) % for the gynaecological area, (0.79 ± 4.55) % for VMAT-breast, (3.48 ± 4.00) % for 3DCRT-breast, (0.70 ± 3.20) % for head and neck, (5.63 ± 5.48)% for lung, (-1.36 ± 2.98) % for rectum and anal canal, and (0.13 ± 3.53) % for the urological system.
CONCLUSION: EPIgray should support tolerance levels asymmetric with respect to zero, given the positive deviation observed in mean dose for lung, breast, and head and neck regions. Additionally, the system's ability to detect dose variations during treatment could help identify changes in tumor volume.