pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.24639 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-27 · ⚛️ physics.med-ph · physics.ins-det

Recognition: unknown

Addressing respiratory gating latency for accurate pulse delivery in preclinical electron FLASH irradiation on a clinical linear accelerator

Billy W. Loo Jr, Brianna Lau, Edward Graves, Emil Sch\"uler, Erinn B. Rankin, Jinghui Wang, Karl K. Bush, Lawrie Skinner, Luis A. Soto, Murat Surucu, Peter G. Maxim, Rakesh Manjappa, Ramish Ashraf, Rie von Eyben, Ryan B. Ko, Shu-Jung Yu, Stavros Melemenidis, Vignesh Viswanathan

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 17:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.med-ph physics.ins-det
keywords respiratory gatinglatencyFLASH irradiationelectron pulseslinear acceleratorpulse deliverypreclinical researchdose accuracy
0
0 comments X

The pith

Accounting for respiratory gating latency enables accurate delivery of specified numbers of pulses on clinical linear accelerators for FLASH irradiation.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper demonstrates how clinical linear accelerators can be adapted for precise control of ultra-rapid electron pulses despite inherent system delays. By measuring the timing latency in the respiratory gating system and testing two control methods, the work achieves reliable delivery of exact pulse counts for both standard and custom sequences. This matters for FLASH research because experiments typically rely on a small number of high-dose pulses, where even small errors in count affect dose accuracy, particularly in fractionated regimens. The approach uses existing equipment like monitor chambers and internal timing signals rather than requiring new hardware. Overall, it provides a practical path to reproducible dosing in preclinical studies of biological FLASH effects.

Core claim

Characterizing the temporal latency of the respiratory gating system on a Varian Trilogy linac allows selection of optimal timing parameters for two methods: an adaptive approach using only the delivered pulse signal and a synchronization approach that also reads the linac internal pulse-timing signal. Programmable controller boards and a relay circuit monitor and control beam delivery through the built-in monitor chamber. Both methods then achieve high accuracy in delivering the desired number of pulses across standard and customized sequences.

What carries the argument

The respiratory gating system combined with programmable controllers and a relay circuit that monitors pulses via the monitor chamber, adjusted using measured latency values in either an adaptive method based on delivered signals or a synchronization method incorporating internal timing signals.

Load-bearing premise

The latency parameters measured on the Varian Trilogy remain stable and representative when applied to actual biological experiments, with no additional uncharacterized variability from other system components or pulse sequences.

What would settle it

Running repeated test deliveries of specific pulse counts on the actual linac setup and checking whether the observed delivered counts match the target within a few percent error, or repeating the tests during real biological irradiations to detect any unexpected variability.

read the original abstract

Background: Clinical linear accelerators are an accessible platform for preclinical research on the biological effects of ultra rapid electron irradiation (FLASH). However, they are not inherently designed for the accurate pulse control required for experiments using a small number of relatively high-dose pulses, and available methods for beam control such as respiratory gating can be error prone owing to system latency. Here we experimentally characterize the temporal latency of the respiratory gating system for controlling beam-on and beam-off at the individual linac pulse level. Methods and Materials: We used programmable controller boards and a relay circuit to monitor and control delivery of specific numbers of pulses through the built-in monitor chamber and respiratory gating system of a Varian Trilogy linac. We implemented two methods an adaptive method using only the delivered pulse signal, and a synchronization method additionally using the linac internal pulse-timing signal and characterized their performance for standard and customized pulse sequences. Results: Characterizing the latency parameters permitted choosing optimal timing parameters that maximized the rate of successfully delivering the desired number of pulses using both adaptive and synchronization methods. Conclusions: We demonstrated that accounting for latency and/or using the ability to read the prior information on expected pulse timing can provide high accuracy in delivering specified numbers of pulses. This reliability is critical for accurate dose delivery in preclinical FLASH research of single fraction and especially fractionated dosing regimens. The ability to generate custom pulse sequences enables more detailed exploration of the temporal dependence of biological FLASH effects.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript experimentally characterizes the temporal latency of the respiratory gating system on a Varian Trilogy clinical linac to enable precise delivery of specified numbers of electron pulses for preclinical FLASH studies. Using programmable controller boards and a relay circuit to monitor the built-in monitor chamber and gating signals, the authors implement and compare an adaptive method (based solely on delivered pulse signals) and a synchronization method (additionally using internal linac pulse-timing information) across standard and custom pulse sequences. They conclude that measuring latency parameters allows selection of optimal timing settings that achieve high accuracy in pulse delivery, which is essential for reproducible dosing in single-fraction and fractionated FLASH experiments.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold under realistic conditions, this provides a practical, hardware-accessible approach to overcome inherent limitations of clinical linacs for small-pulse-count FLASH research. The work directly supports more reliable preclinical studies of ultra-high dose-rate effects and enables custom sequences for probing temporal biological dependencies. The purely experimental, measurement-driven nature (no fitted models or derivations) makes the findings potentially straightforward to reproduce on similar platforms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods and Materials] Methods and Materials: The latency characterization and performance testing were performed in a controlled bench setup with the controller board and relay circuit monitoring the monitor chamber and gating signals. However, the central claim that this yields 'high accuracy' and 'reliability' for preclinical FLASH research assumes these latency values remain representative when additional hardware (animal holders, anesthesia rigs, positioning stages, real-time monitoring) is present. No validation data or discussion of potential added jitter or signal propagation changes from these components is provided, which is load-bearing for applicability to biological experiments.
  2. [Results] Results: The abstract and conclusions state that latency characterization 'permitted choosing optimal timing parameters that maximized the rate of successfully delivering the desired number of pulses,' yet the provided summary contains no quantitative success rates, error bars, sample sizes, or statistical comparisons between adaptive and synchronization methods. Full results must include these metrics (e.g., success fraction per sequence type) to substantiate the 'high accuracy' claim and allow assessment of improvement over uncompensated gating.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a single sentence summarizing the achieved success rates or latency values to give readers an immediate sense of the quantitative outcome.
  2. Figure captions (if present in full text) should explicitly state the number of trials and any error bars shown for latency measurements and success rates.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive review and for recognizing the significance of our experimental characterization of respiratory gating latency on the Varian Trilogy linac for preclinical FLASH studies. We address each major comment point by point below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: [Methods and Materials] Methods and Materials: The latency characterization and performance testing were performed in a controlled bench setup with the controller board and relay circuit monitoring the monitor chamber and gating signals. However, the central claim that this yields 'high accuracy' and 'reliability' for preclinical FLASH research assumes these latency values remain representative when additional hardware (animal holders, anesthesia rigs, positioning stages, real-time monitoring) is present. No validation data or discussion of potential added jitter or signal propagation changes from these components is provided, which is load-bearing for applicability to biological experiments.

    Authors: We agree that our measurements were obtained in a controlled bench-top configuration isolating the linac gating and monitor-chamber signals. The latency values we report are intrinsic to the respiratory gating hardware and pulse-monitoring circuitry of the Varian Trilogy. Additional experimental hardware could introduce further propagation delays or jitter, and we did not perform dedicated tests with animal holders, anesthesia rigs, or positioning stages. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit discussion paragraph acknowledging these potential sources of variability and advising investigators to perform end-to-end timing verification in their specific preclinical setups. This addition will clarify the scope of our claims without overstating generalizability. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results] Results: The abstract and conclusions state that latency characterization 'permitted choosing optimal timing parameters that maximized the rate of successfully delivering the desired number of pulses,' yet the provided summary contains no quantitative success rates, error bars, sample sizes, or statistical comparisons between adaptive and synchronization methods. Full results must include these metrics (e.g., success fraction per sequence type) to substantiate the 'high accuracy' claim and allow assessment of improvement over uncompensated gating.

    Authors: The Results section of the full manuscript already contains the quantitative performance data, including success fractions for each pulse-sequence type, sample sizes, and direct comparisons of the adaptive versus synchronization methods. However, we recognize that the abstract and concluding statements summarize these findings only qualitatively. In the revised manuscript we will update the abstract to report the key numerical outcomes (e.g., success rates achieved with optimal timing settings for both methods) and will ensure the conclusions explicitly reference the quantitative improvement over uncompensated gating. These changes will make the supporting metrics immediately visible to readers. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely experimental hardware characterization

full rationale

The manuscript reports direct bench measurements of gating latency on a Varian Trilogy linac using a controller board and relay circuit to monitor the monitor chamber and gating signals. Optimal timing parameters are chosen from these measured values and then applied in test sequences; success rates are reported from the same experimental runs. No equations, fitted models, predictions, or derivations are present. No self-citations are invoked to justify any load-bearing step. The work is self-contained empirical engineering with no reduction of outputs to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on direct experimental measurement of system latency rather than on any modeled parameters or theoretical assumptions; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5635 in / 1146 out tokens · 110353 ms · 2026-05-07T17:31:55.090853+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ultrahigh dose-rate FLASH irradiation increases the differential response between normal and tumor tissue in mice

    Favaudon, Vincent, et al. "Ultrahigh dose-rate FLASH irradiation increases the differential response between normal and tumor tissue in mice." Science translational medicine 6.245 (2014): 245ra93-245ra9

  2. [2]

    FLASH: New intersection of physics, chemistry, biology, and cancer medicine

    Vozenin, Marie-Catherine, et al. "FLASH: New intersection of physics, chemistry, biology, and cancer medicine." Reviews of Modern Physics 96.3 (2024): 035002

  3. [3]

    Clinical translation of FLASH radiotherapy: Why and how?

    Bourhis, Jean, et al. "Clinical translation of FLASH radiotherapy: Why and how?." Radiotherapy and oncology 139 (2019): 11-17

  4. [4]

    Navigating the critical translational questions for implementing FLASH in the clinic

    Loo Jr, Billy W., et al. "Navigating the critical translational questions for implementing FLASH in the clinic." Seminars in radiation oncology. Vol. 34. No. 3. WB Saunders, 2024

  5. [5]

    Ultra ‐ high dose rate electron beams and the FLASH effect: from preclinical evidence to a new radiotherapy paradigm

    Schüler, Emil, et al. "Ultra ‐ high dose rate electron beams and the FLASH effect: from preclinical evidence to a new radiotherapy paradigm." Medical physics 49.3 (2022): 2082-2095

  6. [6]

    Dosimetry with a clinical linac adapted to FLASH electron beams

    Szpala, Stanislaw, et al. "Dosimetry with a clinical linac adapted to FLASH electron beams." Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 22.6 (2021): 50-59

  7. [7]

    FLASH radiotherapy with electrons: issues related to the production, monitoring, and dosimetric characterization of the beam

    Di Martino, Fabio, et al. "FLASH radiotherapy with electrons: issues related to the production, monitoring, and dosimetric characterization of the beam." Frontiers in Physics 8 (2020): 570697. Page 26

  8. [8]

    Individual pulse monitoring and dose control system for pre-clinical implementation of FLASH-RT

    Ashraf, M. Ramish, et al. "Individual pulse monitoring and dose control system for pre-clinical implementation of FLASH-RT." Physics in Medicine & Biology 67.9 (2022): 095003

  9. [9]

    A systematic review of electron FLASH dosimetry and beam control mechanisms utilized with modified non ‐ clinical LINACs

    DeFrancisco, Justin, and Siyong Kim. "A systematic review of electron FLASH dosimetry and beam control mechanisms utilized with modified non ‐ clinical LINACs." Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 26.4 (2025): e70051. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70051

  10. [10]

    Experimental platform for ultra-high dose rate FLASH irradiation of small animals using a clinical linear accelerator

    Schüler, Emil, et al. "Experimental platform for ultra-high dose rate FLASH irradiation of small animals using a clinical linear accelerator." International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics 97.1 (2017): 195-203

  11. [11]

    Electron FLASH delivery at treatment room isocenter for efficient reversible conversion of a clinical LINAC

    Rahman, Mahbubur, et al. "Electron FLASH delivery at treatment room isocenter for efficient reversible conversion of a clinical LINAC." International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics 110.3 (2021): 872-882

  12. [12]

    Modifying a clinical linear accelerator for delivery of ultra-high dose rate irradiation

    Lempart, Michael, et al. "Modifying a clinical linear accelerator for delivery of ultra-high dose rate irradiation." Radiotherapy and Oncology 139 (2019): 40-45

  13. [13]

    Beam control system and output fine-tuning for safe and precise delivery of FLASH radiotherapy at a clinical linear accelerator

    Konradsson, Elise, et al. "Beam control system and output fine-tuning for safe and precise delivery of FLASH radiotherapy at a clinical linear accelerator." Frontiers in Oncology 14 (2024): 1342488

  14. [14]

    Initial experience with an electron FLASH research extension (FLEX) for the Clinac system

    Oh, Kyuhak, et al. "Initial experience with an electron FLASH research extension (FLEX) for the Clinac system." Journal of applied clinical medical physics 25.2 (2024): e14159

  15. [15]

    Commissioning of a linear accelerator producing ultra ‐ high dose rate electrons

    Cetnar, Ashley J., et al. "Commissioning of a linear accelerator producing ultra ‐ high dose rate electrons." Medical Physics 51.2 (2024): 1415-1420

  16. [16]

    Ultra-high dose rate FLASH irradiator at the radiological research accelerator facility

    Garty, Guy, et al. "Ultra-high dose rate FLASH irradiator at the radiological research accelerator facility." Scientific reports 12.1 (2022): 22149. Page 27

  17. [17]

    Geometry-optimized electron beam scattering foils enabling dose uniformity and dose rate enhancement for FLASH radiotherapy studies

    Lv, Jianfeng, et al. "Geometry-optimized electron beam scattering foils enabling dose uniformity and dose rate enhancement for FLASH radiotherapy studies." Physics in Medicine & Biology 70.18 (2025): 185009

  18. [18]

    Effects of dose-rate on the radiation response of rat skin

    Field, S. B.,and D. K. Bewley. "Effects of dose-rate on the radiation response of rat skin." International Journal of Radiation Biology and Related Studies in Physics, Chemistry and Medicine 26.3 (1974): 259-267

  19. [19]

    Towards clinical translation of FLASH radiotherapy

    Vozenin, Marie-Catherine, Jean Bourhis, and Marco Durante. "Towards clinical translation of FLASH radiotherapy." Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology 19.12 (2022): 791-803

  20. [20]

    Dosimetric calibration of anatomy-specific ultra-high dose rate electron irradiation platform for preclinical FLASH radiobiology experiments

    Wang J, Melemenidis S, Manjappa R, et al. Dosimetric calibration of anatomy-specific ultra-high dose rate electron irradiation platform for preclinical FLASH radiobiology experiments. Med Phys . 2024; 51: 9166–9178. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.17432

  21. [21]

    Beam intensity and stability control on a modified clinical linear accelerator for FLASH irradiation

    Tan, Yuewen, et al. "Beam intensity and stability control on a modified clinical linear accelerator for FLASH irradiation." Physics in Medicine and Biology (2025)

  22. [22]

    Electron FLASH platform for pre-clinical research: LINAC modification, simplification of pulse control and dosimetry

    Zhou, Banghao, et al. "Electron FLASH platform for pre-clinical research: LINAC modification, simplification of pulse control and dosimetry." arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.15426 (2024)

  23. [23]

    Clinical linear accelerator-based electron FLASH: pathway for practical translation to FLASH clinical trials

    No, Hyunsoo Joshua, et al. "Clinical linear accelerator-based electron FLASH: pathway for practical translation to FLASH clinical trials." International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics 117.2 (2023): 482-492

  24. [24]

    Abdominal FLASH irradiation reduces radiation-induced gastrointestinal toxicity for the treatment of ovarian cancer in mice

    Levy, Karen, et al. "Abdominal FLASH irradiation reduces radiation-induced gastrointestinal toxicity for the treatment of ovarian cancer in mice." Scientific reports 10.1 (2020): 21600. Page 28

  25. [25]

    Evaluation of linear accelerator gating with real-time electromagnetic tracking

    Smith, Ryan L., et al. "Evaluation of linear accelerator gating with real-time electromagnetic tracking." International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics 74.3 (2009): 920-927

  26. [26]

    Delivery efficiency of an Elekta linac under gated operation

    Cui, Guoqiang, et al. "Delivery efficiency of an Elekta linac under gated operation." Journal of applied clinical medical physics 15.5 (2014): 2-11

  27. [27]

    Time delay measurement for linac based treatment delivery in synchronized respiratory gating radiotherapy

    Jin, Jian ‐ Yue, and Fang ‐ Fang Yin. "Time delay measurement for linac based treatment delivery in synchronized respiratory gating radiotherapy." Medical Physics 32.5 (2005): 1293-1296

  28. [28]

    High temporal resolution characterization of gating response time

    Wiersma, Rodney D., et al. "High temporal resolution characterization of gating response time." Medical physics 43.6Part1 (2016): 2802-2806

  29. [29]

    Esben Schjødt Worm, Jakob Borup Thomsen, Jacob Graversen Johansen, Per Rugaard Poulsen, A simple method to measure the gating latencies in photon and proton based radiotherapy using a scintillating crystal, Medical Physics, 10.1002/mp.16418, 50, 6, (3289-3298), (2023)

  30. [30]

    Characterization of clinical linear accelerator triggering latency for motion management system development

    Shepard, Andrew J., et al. "Characterization of clinical linear accelerator triggering latency for motion management system development." Medical physics 45.11 (2018): 4816-4821. Page 29 Supplementary Figure S1: Flowchart of the algorithm used in the adaptive method of beam control. Page 30 Figure S2. Experimental instances of beam delivered with request ...