000179541 001__ 179541
000179541 005__ 20240229145546.0
000179541 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.3389/fonc.2022.830080
000179541 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:35402273
000179541 0247_ $$2pmc$$apmc:PMC8990863
000179541 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:125354975
000179541 037__ $$aDKFZ-2022-00719
000179541 041__ $$aEnglish
000179541 082__ $$a610
000179541 1001_ $$aReidel, Claire-Anne$$b0
000179541 245__ $$aExperimental Comparison of Fiducial Markers Used in Proton Therapy: Study of Different Imaging Modalities and Proton Fluence Perturbations Measured With CMOS Pixel Sensors.
000179541 260__ $$aLausanne$$bFrontiers Media$$c2022
000179541 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000179541 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000179541 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1650877041_22266
000179541 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000179541 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000179541 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000179541 520__ $$aFiducial markers are used for image guidance to verify the correct positioning of the target for the case of tumors that can suffer interfractional motion during proton therapy. The markers should be visible on daily imaging, but at the same time, they should produce minimal streak artifacts in the CT scans for treatment planning and induce only slight dose perturbations during particle therapy. In this work, these three criteria were experimentally investigated at the Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center. Several small fiducial markers with different geometries and materials (gold, platinum, and carbon-coated ZrO2) were evaluated. The streak artifacts on treatment planning CT were measured with and without iMAR correction, showing significantly smaller artifacts from markers lighter than 6 mg and a clear improvement with iMAR correction. Daily imaging as X-ray projections and in-room mobile CT were also performed. Markers heavier than 6 mg showed a better contrast in the X-ray projections, whereas on the images from the in-room mobile CT, all markers were clearly visible. In the other part of this work, fluence perturbations of proton beams were measured for the same markers by using a tracker system of several high spatial resolution CMOS pixel sensors. The measurements were performed for single-energy beams, as well as for a spread-out Bragg peak. Three-dimensional fluence distributions were computed after reconstructing all particle trajectories. These measurements clearly showed that the ZrO2 markers and the low-mass gold/platinum markers (0.35mm diameter) induce perturbations being 2-3 times lower than the heavier gold or platinum markers of 0.5mm diameter. Monte Carlo simulations, using the FLUKA code, were used to compute dose distributions and showed good agreement with the experimental data after adjusting the phase space of the simulated proton beam compared to the experimental beam.
000179541 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$a315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)$$cPOF4-315$$fPOF IV$$x0
000179541 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo02.dkfz.de
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$aCMOS pixel sensor
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$aMonte Carlo simulation
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$adose perturbation
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$afiducial marker
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$aimage guidance
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$aproton therapy
000179541 650_7 $$2Other$$astreak artifacts
000179541 7001_ $$aHorst, Felix$$b1
000179541 7001_ $$aSchuy, Christoph$$b2
000179541 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)440a3f62ea9ea5c63375308976fc4c44$$aJäkel, Oliver$$b3$$udkfz
000179541 7001_ $$aEcker, Swantje$$b4
000179541 7001_ $$aHenkner, Katrin$$b5
000179541 7001_ $$aBrons, Stephan$$b6
000179541 7001_ $$aDurante, Marco$$b7
000179541 7001_ $$aWeber, Uli$$b8
000179541 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2649216-7$$a10.3389/fonc.2022.830080$$gVol. 12, p. 830080$$p830080$$tFrontiers in oncology$$v12$$x2234-943X$$y2022
000179541 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:179541$$pVDB
000179541 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)440a3f62ea9ea5c63375308976fc4c44$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b3$$kDKFZ
000179541 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vBildgebung und Radioonkologie$$x0
000179541 9141_ $$y2022
000179541 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)$$bDOAJ$$d2021-01-27
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2021-01-27
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0113$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2021-01-27
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2021-01-27
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2021-01-27
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bFRONT ONCOL : 2021$$d2022-11-08
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2022-11-08
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2022-11-08
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2021-05-11T13:25:45Z
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2021-05-11T13:25:45Z
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Blind peer review$$d2021-05-11T13:25:45Z
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2022-11-08
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2022-11-08
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1110$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Clinical Medicine$$d2022-11-08
000179541 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9905$$2StatID$$aIF >= 5$$bFRONT ONCOL : 2021$$d2022-11-08
000179541 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331$$kE040$$lE040 Med. Physik in der Strahlentherapie$$x0
000179541 980__ $$ajournal
000179541 980__ $$aVDB
000179541 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E040-20160331
000179541 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED