TU‐CD‐304‐02: Planning and Delivery of Fully Dynamic Trajectory Modulated Arc Therapy On Pituitary Adenoma: Dosimetric Advantages Over Conventional Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the potential benefit of trajectory modulated arc therapy (TMAT) for treatments of small benign intracranial tumor, pituitary adenoma. Methods: A TMAT planning platform that incorporates complex source motion trajectory involving synchronized gantry rotation with translational and rotational couch movement was used for the study. The platform couples an interactive trajectory generation tool with a VMAT algorithm that performs multi‐resolution, progressive sampling MLC optimization on a user‐designed trajectory. A continuous couch rotation of 160° angular span with ±20° mini gantry arcs was used to emulate a non‐coplanar horizontal arc‐like trajectory. Compared to conventional non‐coplanar gantry arcs (60°‐100° gantry rotation with couch kicks), TMAT limited the unnecessary low to medium dose spread in the anterior and posterior directions, where primary OARs (e.g., brainstem, optic chiasm, optic nerves, and lens) are in close proximity to the targeted pituitary tumor volume. For 5 standard fractionation pituitary adenoma cases (50.4Gy/28fractions), TMAT and non‐coplanar VMAT plans were generated and compared under equivalent objectives/constraints. TMAT delivery was implemented and demonstrated on Varian TrueBeam via XML scripts. Results: Both techniques showed good target coverage while OARs were able to meet the constraints on QUANTEC guidelines. Notably, TMAT decreased the dose deposition in the anterior‐to‐posterior direction surrounding PTV. TMAT significantly reduced the mean doses on brainstem, optic nerves, eyes and lens by 47.29%±13.17%, 28.51%±8.68%, 80.82%±8.71% and 65.38%±19.99% compared with VMAT, all p≤0.01. Percentage reductions of maximum point dose in eyes and lens were 75.68%±10.30% and 70.72%±18.62% respectively for TMAT versus VMAT, all p≤0.01. A representative isocentric TMAT pituitary plan was delivered via an XML script with 200 control points and 282 MUs. Conclusion: Deliverable TMAT plans were achieved in developer mode in TrueBeam. TMAT was shown to be superior for pituitary adenoma irradiation in terms of OARs sparing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".