MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973560444 · doi:10.1118/1.1495864

Integration of digital fluoroscopy with CT‐based radiation therapy planning of lung tumors

2002· article· en· W1973560444 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Ruschin, Katharina E. Sixel

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluoroscopyRadiation therapyRadiation treatment planningMedical physicsMedicineRadiologyMedical imagingDosimetryComputed tomographyNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiation dose escalation may be a means to increase the local control rate of inoperable lung tumors. Treatment plans involve the creation of a uniform planning target volume (PTV) to ensure proper coverage despite patient breathing and setup error. This may lead to unnecessary radiation of normal tissue in shallow breathers or target underdosing for patients with excess internal motion. Therefore, the nature of tumor motion for each patient should be measured in 3D, something that cannot be done with CT alone. We have developed a method that acquires 2D real-time fluoroscopic images (loops) and coregisters them with 2D digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) formed from the CT scan. The limitations of CT to encompass motion can be overcome by merging the two modalities together. The accuracy of the coregistration method is tested with a stationary grid of radio-opaque markers at various spatial positions. The in-plane (at-depth) displacement between markers on the fluoroscopic image versus the DRR varies with position across the image due to slight misalignments between the x-ray source used in fluoroscopy and the virtual source used for the DRR relative to the test object. At clinically relevant positions, the maximum, measured in-plane displacement, is 1.1 mm. The method is applied to the thorax of an anthropomorphic phantom and a good fit is observed between the appearances of the bony anatomical structures on the coregistered image. Finally, a series of motion measurements are carried out on two oscillating cylindrical objects. The degree of motion as measured by fluoroscopy is accurate to within 1.0 mm, whereas the DRR is inconsistent in predicting motion. The coregistration of fluoroscopic loops with the DRR shows at what point within the oscillation the DRR fails to encompass motion. For any treatment site involving target motion, this real-time imaging is a useful asset in the planning stage.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207