SU‐E‐T‐368: Evaluating Dosimetric Outcome of Modulated Photon Radiotherapy (XMRT) Optimization for Head and Neck Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The dosimetric outcome of optimized treatment plans obtained by modulating the photon beamlet energy and fluence on a small cohort of four Head and Neck (H and N) patients was investigated. This novel optimization technique is denoted XMRT for modulated photon radiotherapy. The dosimetric plans from XMRT for H and N treatment were compared to conventional, 6 MV intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) optimization plans. Methods: An arrangement of two non‐coplanar and five coplanar beams was used for all four H and N patients. Both XMRT and IMRT were subject to the same optimization algorithm, with XMRT optimization allowing both 6 and 18 MV beamlets while IMRT was restricted to 6 MV only. The optimization algorithm was based on a linear programming approach with partial‐volume constraints implemented via the conditional value‐at‐risk method. H and N constraints were based off of those mentioned in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1016 protocol. XMRT and IMRT solutions were assessed using metrics suggested by International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements report 83. The Gurobi solver was used in conjunction with the CVX package to solve each optimization problem. Dose calculations and analysis were done in CERR using Monte Carlo dose calculation with VMC₊₊. Results: Both XMRT and IMRT solutions met all clinical criteria. Trade‐offs were observed between improved dose uniformity to the primary target volume (PTV1) and increased dose to some of the surrounding healthy organs for XMRT compared to IMRT. On average, IMRT improved dose to the contralateral parotid gland and spinal cord while XMRT improved dose to the brainstem and mandible. Conclusion: Bi‐energy XMRT optimization for H and N patients provides benefits in terms of improved dose uniformity to the primary target and reduced dose to some healthy structures, at the expense of increased dose to other healthy structures when compared with IMRT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".