IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/adp/jctoij/v9y2018i5p4-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A technical note: When Do Differences in IMRT Fluence Intensities have Clinical Significance?

Author

Listed:
  • Yousif Y AM
  • AJ Van Rensburg

    (Department of Radiation Oncology, Steve Biko Academic Hospital, South Africa)

Abstract

The purpose of this exercise was to test the validity of gamma pass and fail criteria in order to develop a better method for clinical evaluation. This was performed through introducing artificial changes into a clinical IMRT plan and then followed by recalculation and evaluation. Although, the results showed that the IMRT plan has failed to meet the gamma evaluation criteria, the plan was still clinically acceptable when assessed by clinicians. This proved that the passing rate for IMRT fluence maps QA occasionally may not associated with the clinical significance of the plan.

Suggested Citation

  • Yousif Y AM & AJ Van Rensburg, 2018. "A technical note: When Do Differences in IMRT Fluence Intensities have Clinical Significance?," Cancer Therapy & Oncology International Journal, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 9(5), pages 4-7, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:adp:jctoij:v:9:y:2018:i:5:p:4-7
    DOI: 10.19080/CTOIJ.2018.09.555777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://juniperpublishers.com/ctoij/pdf/CTOIJ.MS.ID.555777.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://juniperpublishers.com/ctoij/CTOIJ.MS.ID.555777.php
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.19080/CTOIJ.2018.09.555777?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:adp:jctoij:v:9:y:2018:i:5:p:4-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Robert Thomas (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.