Carbon ions beam therapy monitoring with the INSIDE in-beam PET
Physics in Medicine and Biology, ISSN: 1361-6560, Vol: 63, Issue: 14, Page: 145018
2018
- 39Citations
- 30Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations39
- Citation Indexes39
- 39
- CrossRef7
- Captures30
- Readers30
- 30
Article Description
In vivo range monitoring techniques are necessary in order to fully take advantage of the high dose gradients deliverable in hadrontherapy treatments. Positron emission tomography (PET) scanners can be used to monitor beam-induced activation in tissues and hence measure the range. The INSIDE (Innovative Solutions for In-beam DosimEtry in Hadrontherapy) in-beam PET scanner, installed at the Italian National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO, Pavia, Italy) synchrotron facility, has already been successfully tested in vivo during a proton therapy treatment. We discuss here the system performance evaluation with carbon ion beams, in view of future in vivo tests. The work is focused on the analysis of activity images obtained with therapeutic treatments delivered to polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) phantoms, as well as on the test of an innovative and robust Monte Carlo simulation technique for the production of reliable prior activity maps. Images are reconstructed using different integration intervals, so as to monitor the activity evolution during and after the treatment. Three procedures to compare activity images are presented, namely Pearson correlation coefficient, Beam's eye view and overall view. Images of repeated irradiations of the same treatments are compared to assess the integration time necessary to provide reproducible images. The range agreement between simulated and experimental images is also evaluated, so as to validate the simulation capability to provide sound prior information. The results indicate that at treatment end, or at most 20 s afterwards, the range measurement is reliable within 1-2 mm, when comparing both different experimental sessions and data with simulations. In conclusion, this work shows that the INSIDE in-beam PET scanner performance is promising towards its in vivo test with carbon ions.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85050755012&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aacab8; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29873299; https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/aacab8; https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aacab8; https://validate.perfdrive.com/9730847aceed30627ebd520e46ee70b2/?ssa=5283fc54-226e-4b3b-9873-3a854ac7c6ca&ssb=87200246542&ssc=https%3A%2F%2Fiopscience.iop.org%2Farticle%2F10.1088%2F1361-6560%2Faacab8&ssi=ff08b7ba-cnvj-42eb-b2ef-84d292948392&ssk=botmanager_support@radware.com&ssm=7594212476639619442790067940109352&ssn=07f82092469d86b02c618c9c974df6d66abf765553ad-d587-4971-811467&sso=86b6fa66-0a667121c17a164743016db9c77ca8b61dba2e3b01363950&ssp=97123725481734354191173446065447193&ssq=37636521370788092166570207444546411674821&ssr=NTIuMy4yMTcuMjU0&sst=com.plumanalytics&ssu=&ssv=&ssw=&ssx=eyJfX3V6bWYiOiI3ZjYwMDBhYWEwODA3OS0yYjZmLTQzMWUtYWIwYi1iMzU3NDJlZTczNmYxNzM0MzcwMjA3OTY2NDM0OTkzOTQtZjJmOWRlNjg5ZDhlNzJlZjQyNzkiLCJyZCI6ImlvcC5vcmciLCJ1em14IjoiN2Y5MDAwNTliYWMzNmYtYzI0Mi00MmUwLWI4Y2ItNTMzOGQ0YWJiOGIyMi0xNzM0MzcwMjA3OTY2NDM0OTkzOTQtMGJiOWFkZDlhZjBiZGI5MjQyNzkifQ==
IOP Publishing
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know