MO‐F‐CAMPUS‐T‐03: Continuous Dose Delivery with Gamma Knife Perfexion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: We propose continuous dose delivery techniques for stereotactic treatments delivered by Gamma Knife Perfexion using inverse treatment planning system that can be applied to various tumour sites in the brain. We test the accuracy of the plans on Perfexion's planning system (GammaPlan) to ensure the obtained plans are viable. This approach introduces continuous dose delivery for Perefxion, as opposed to the currently employed step‐and‐shoot approaches, for different tumour sites. Additionally, this is the first realization of automated inverse planning on GammaPlan. Methods: The inverse planning approach is divided into two steps of identifying a quality path inside the target, and finding the best collimator composition for the path. To find a path, we select strategic regions inside the target volume and find a path that visits each region exactly once. This path is then passed to a mathematical model which finds the best combination of collimators and their durations. The mathematical model minimizes the dose spillage to the surrounding tissues while ensuring the prescribed dose is delivered to the target(s). Organs‐at‐risk and their corresponding allowable doses can also be added to the model to protect adjacent organs. Results: We test this approach on various tumour sizes and sites. The quality of the obtained treatment plans are comparable or better than forward plans and inverse plans that use step‐ and‐shoot technique. The conformity indices in the obtained continuous dose delivery plans are similar to those of forward plans while the beam‐on time is improved on average (see Table 1 in supporting document). Conclusion: We employ inverse planning for continuous dose delivery in Perfexion for brain tumours. The quality of the obtained plans is similar to forward and inverse plans that use conventional step‐and‐shoot technique. We tested the inverse plans on GammaPlan to verify clinical relevance. This research was partially supported by Elekta, Sweden (vendor of Gamma Knife Perfexion).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".