PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 19, 2026Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics2 citationsOpen Access

Multi‐institutional validation of hypersight CBCT‐based dose calculation on O‐ring linacs

View Full Paper
CLChih‐Yuan LinYCYi‐Ling ChenCCChia‐Chi Chang

Key Points

  • This study aims to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of HyperSight CBCT for treatment planning in radiotherapy.
  • Included three institutions equipped with HyperSight imaging on the Halcyon platform.
  • Generated HU-to-density calibration curves using CT scanners and phantoms.
  • Conducted dosimetric assessments using gamma analysis and DVH-based metrics.
  • Performed end-to-end testing with an anthropomorphic phantom using ion chambers and film dosimetry.
  • HU-to-density curves showed consistent behavior across institutions.
  • DVH-based metrics indicated differences generally within 1% between CBCTp, CBCT, and CT.
  • Gamma analysis yielded passing rates of ≥ 98.5% for both CBCTp and CBCT.
  • End-to-end testing found CBCT-based plans agreed within ± 4% of measured doses.

Abstract

Abstract Background Conventional cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) systems are limited by suboptimal image quality, inaccurate Hounsfield unit (HU) calibration, and reduced reliability for dose calculation. HyperSight CBCT on the Halcyon platform offers improved HU accuracy, expanded field‐of‐view (FOV), and enhanced image quality. Purpose This study aimed to assess the dosimetric accuracy of treatment planning using HyperSight CBCT through phantom‐based dose verification. Methods This study included three institutions equipped with the HyperSight imaging system on the Halcyon platform, with all procedures performed after acceptance testing and calibration. Each institution generated HU‐to‐density calibration curves using computed tomography (CT) scanners and standardized phantoms, and corresponding CBCT for planning (CBCTp) scans were also acquired. Additional CBCTp scans were acquired using a consistent phantom model (062 M) across the three institutions. Reference treatment plans were created on CT images and transferred to CBCTp and CBCT datasets for dose recalculation using identical parameters. Dosimetric assessment included gamma analysis and comparisons of DVH‐based dosimetric metrics for relevant regions of interest (ROIs). End‐to‐end testing with an anthropomorphic phantom was performed using ion chamber measurements and film dosimetry at brain, bone, and thorax locations. Results HU‐to‐density curves showed consistent behavior across institutions, with larger variability only at higher densities. CBCTp calibrations agreed well with vendor references. DVH‐based dosimetric metrics showed differences generally within 1% for both CBCTp and CBCT when compared with CT. Across institutions, gamma analysis of both CBCTp and CBCT yielded high passing rates (≥ 98.5% at 3%/2 mm). End‐to‐end testing with film dosimetry showed that CBCT‐based plans agreed with measured doses within ± 4%, while CT‐based plans were within ± 3%. Ion chamber measurements showed all dose differences within ± 2.3%, with both CBCTp and CBCT within ± 1.0% of CT. Conclusions HyperSight CBCT provides accurate dose calculations when properly calibrated. Phantom‐based validation demonstrated sub‐2% deviations and strong agreement with CT, supporting its clinical use in adaptive radiotherapy.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lin et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6996a887ecb39a600b3ef5bfhttps://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70512
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper