2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2020.109060
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental validation of an analytical microdosimetric model based on Geant4-DNA simulations by using a silicon-based microdosimeter

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Third, we have customized a low-noise multi-channel readout electronics system to work at therapeutic fluence rates. Fourth, both the experimental and are in good agreement with the expected trends in the literature in the Bragg peak and distal edge (with energy values equivalent to those used herein) in clinical proton beams 29 , 58 and radiology accelerator platforms 59 with solid-state microdosimeters, and in a low-energy proton cyclotron 60 with mini-TEPCs. For example, Pan et al 60 obtained an average value of 6.4 keV/ (water-equivalent) irradiating with a 15 MeV proton beam at 50 mm from the cyclotron beam exit to the mini-TEPC (close to our 51 mm distance from the kapton layer in the beam exit to our microsensors).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Third, we have customized a low-noise multi-channel readout electronics system to work at therapeutic fluence rates. Fourth, both the experimental and are in good agreement with the expected trends in the literature in the Bragg peak and distal edge (with energy values equivalent to those used herein) in clinical proton beams 29 , 58 and radiology accelerator platforms 59 with solid-state microdosimeters, and in a low-energy proton cyclotron 60 with mini-TEPCs. For example, Pan et al 60 obtained an average value of 6.4 keV/ (water-equivalent) irradiating with a 15 MeV proton beam at 50 mm from the cyclotron beam exit to the mini-TEPC (close to our 51 mm distance from the kapton layer in the beam exit to our microsensors).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Third, we have customized a low-noise multi-channel readout electronics system to work at therapeutic fluence rates. Fourth, both the experimental ȳF and ȳD are in good agreement with the expected trends in the literature in the Bragg peak and distal edge (with energy values equivalent to those used herein) in clinical proton beams 21,45 and radiology accelerator platforms 46 with solid-state microdosimeters, and in a low-energy proton cyclotron 47 with mini-TEPCs. For example, Pan et al 47 obtained an average ȳD value of 6.4 keV/µm (water-equivalent) irradiating with a 15 MeV proton beam at 50 mm from the cyclotron beam exit to the mini-TEPC (close to our 51 mm distance from the kapton layer in the beam exit to our microsensors).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Spectra shifts were also found in other microdosimetry works, for example, Debrot and Bertolet et al 48,49 . Interestingly, this discrepancy is generally unnoticed in the literature as it is not the pulse‐height spectra that is usually shown, but the microdosimetry spectra, which are in logarithm scale and where the shifts of the peaks are less evident.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Spectra shifts were also found in other microdosimetry works, for example, Debrot and Bertolet et al 48,49 Interestingly, this discrepancy is generally unnoticed in the literature as it is not the pulse-height spectra that is usually shown, but the microdosimetry spectra, which are in logarithm scale and where the shifts of the peaks are less evident. Likewise, Figure 6(right) shows the experimental dose-averaged lineal energy, y D , being 2.17 ± 0.05 keV µm −1 in the entrance, 3.08 ± 0.06 keV µm −1 in the proximal zone, 6.69 ± 0.11 keV µm −1 close to the Bragg peak, and 11.60 ± 0.13 keV µm −1 in the distal edge.…”
Section: Average Pulse-height Spectramentioning
confidence: 77%