SU‐E‐T‐786: Utility of Gold Wires to Optimize Intensity Modulation Capacity of a Novel Directional Modulated Brachytherapy Tandem Applicator for Image Guided Cervical Cancer Brachytherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the impact of using gold wires to differentially fill various channels on plan quality compared with conventional T&R applicator, inside a novel directional modulated brachytherapy (DMBT) tandem applicator for cervical cancer brachytherapy. Materials and Methods: The novel DMBT tandem applicator has a 5.4‐mm diameter MR‐compatible tungsten alloy enclosed in a 0.3‐mm thick plastic tubing that wraps around the tandem. To modulate the radiation intensity, 6 symmetric peripheral holes of 1.3‐mm diameter are grooved along the tungsten alloy rod. These grooved holes are differentially filled with gold wires to generate various degrees of directional beams. For example, three different fill patterns of 1) all void, 2) all filled except the hole containing the 192‐Ir source, and 3) two adjacent holes to the 192‐Ir source filled were Monte Carlo simulated. The resulting 3D dose distributions were imported into an in‐house‐coded inverse optimization planning system to generate HDR brachytherapy clinical plans for 19 patient cases. All plans generated were normalized to the same D90 as the clinical plans and D2cc doses of OARs were evaluated. Prescription ranged between 15 and 17.5Gy. Results: In general, the plans in case 1) resulted in the highest D2cc doses for the OARs with 11.65±2.30Gy, 7.47±3.05Gy, and 9.84±2.48Gy for bladder, rectum, and sigmoid, respectively, although the differences were small. For the case 2), D2cc doses were 11.61±2.29Gy, 7.41±3.07Gy, and 9.75±2.45Gy, respectively. And, for the case 3), D2cc doses were 11.60±2.28Gy, 7.41±3.05Gy, and 9.74±2.45Gy, respectively. Difference between 1) and 2) cases were small with the average D2cc difference of <0.64%. Difference between 1) and 3) cases were even smaller with the average D2cc difference of <0.1%. Conclusions: There is a minimal clinical benefit by differentially filling grooved holes in the novel DMBT tandem applicator for image guided cervical cancer brachytherapy.
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) | 0.001 | 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".