A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Variability of a peripheral dose among various linac geometries for second cancer risk assessment. | LitMetric

Variability of a peripheral dose among various linac geometries for second cancer risk assessment.

Phys Med Biol

University Institute for Radiation Physics, CHUV and University of Lausanne, Grand-Pré 1, CH-1007 Lausanne, Switzerland.

Published: August 2011

Second cancer risk assessment for radiotherapy is controversial due to the large uncertainties of the dose-response relationship. This could be improved by a better assessment of the peripheral doses to healthy organs in future epidemiological studies. In this framework, we developed a simple Monte Carlo (MC) model of the Siemens Primus 6 MV linac for both open and wedged fields that we then validated with dose profiles measured in a water tank up to 30 cm from the central axis. The differences between the measured and calculated doses were comparable to other more complex MC models and never exceeded 50%. We then compared our simple MC model with the peripheral dose profiles of five different linacs with different collimation systems. We found that the peripheral dose between two linacs could differ up to a factor of 9 for small fields (5 × 5 cm2) and up to a factor of 10 for wedged fields. Considering that an uncertainty of 50% in dose estimation could be acceptable in the context of risk assessment, the MC model can be used as a generic model for large open fields (≥10 × 10 cm2) only. The uncertainties in peripheral doses should be considered in future epidemiological studies when designing the width of the dose bins to stratify the risk as a function of the dose.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/56/16/004DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

peripheral dose
12
risk assessment
12
second cancer
8
cancer risk
8
peripheral doses
8
future epidemiological
8
epidemiological studies
8
wedged fields
8
dose profiles
8
dose
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!