Machine learning‐generated decision boundaries for prediction and exploration of patient‐specific quality assurance failures in stereotactic radiosurgery plans
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a form of radiotherapy treatment during which high radiation dose is delivered in a single or few fractions. These treatments require highly conformal plans with steep dose gradients, which can result in an increase in plan complexity prompting the need for stringent pretreatment patient-specific quality assurance (QA) measurements to ensure the planned and measured dose distributions agree within clinical standards. Complexity scores and machine learning (ML) techniques may help with prediction of QA outcomes; however interpretability and usability of those results continues to be an area of study. This study investigates the use of plan complexity metrics as input for an ML model to allow for prediction of QA outcomes for SRS plans as measured via three-dimension (3D) phantom dose verification. Explorations into interpretability and predictive ability, as well as a prospective in-clinic implementation using the resulting model were performed. METHODS: Four hundred ninety-eight plans (1571 volumetric modulated arc therapy arcs) were processed via in-house script to generate several complexity scores. 3D phantom dose verification measurement results were extracted and classified as pass or failure (with failures defined as below 95% voxel agreement passing 3%/1-mm gamma criteria with 10% threshold,) and 1472 of the arcs were split into training and testing sets, with 99 arcs as a sequential holdout set. A z-score scaler was trained on the training set and used to scale all other sets. Variations of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf movement variability, aperture complexity, and leaf size, and monitor unit (MU) at control point weighted target area scores were used as input to a support vector classifier to generate a series of 1D, 2D, and 5D decision boundaries. The best performing 5D model was then used within a prospective in-clinic study providing predictions to physicists prior to ordering 3D phantom dose verification measurements for 38 patient plans (112 arcs). The decision to order 3D phantom dose verification measurements was recorded before and after prediction. RESULTS: Best performing 1D threshold and 2D prediction models with best performance produced a QA failure recall and QA passing recall of 1.00 and 0.55, and 0.82 and 0.82, respectively. Best performing 5D prediction model produced a QA failure recall (sensitivity) of 1.00 and QA passing recall (specificity) of 0.72. This model was then used within a prospective in-clinic study providing predictions to physicists prior to ordering 3D phantom dose verification measurements and achieved a QA failure recall of 1.00 and QA passing recall of 0.58. The decision to order 3D phantom dose verification measurements was recorded before and after measurement. A single initially unidentified failing plan of the prospective cohort was successfully predicted to fail by the model. CONCLUSION: Implementation of complexity score-based prediction models for SRS would allow for support of a clinician's decision to reduce time spent performing QA measurements and avoid patient treatment delays (i.e., in case of QA failure).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».