Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) modeling of late rectal bleeding following external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A Test of the QUANTEC-recommended NTCP model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Validating a predictive model for late rectal bleeding following external beam treatment for prostate cancer would enable safer treatments or dose escalation. We tested the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model recommended in the recent QUANTEC review (quantitative analysis of normal tissue effects in the clinic). MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty one prostate cancer patients were treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer at the British Columbia Cancer Agency in a prospective protocol. The total prescription dose for all patients was 74 Gy, delivered in 2 Gy/fraction. 159 3D treatment planning datasets were available for analysis. Rectal dose volume histograms were extracted and fitted to a Lyman-Kutcher-Burman NTCP model. RESULTS: Late rectal bleeding (>grade 2) was observed in 12/159 patients (7.5%). Multivariate logistic regression with dose-volume parameters (V50, V60, V70, etc.) was non-significant. Among clinical variables, only age was significant on a Kaplan-Meier log-rank test (p=0.007, with an optimal cut point of 77 years). Best-fit Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model parameters (with 95% confidence intervals) were: n = 0.068 (0.01, +infinity); m =0.14 (0.0, 0.86); and TD50 = 81 (27, 136) Gy. The peak values fall within the 95% QUANTEC confidence intervals. On this dataset, both models had only modest ability to predict complications: the best-fit model had a Spearman's rank correlation coefficient of rs = 0.099 (p = 0.11) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.62; the QUANTEC model had rs=0.096 (p= 0.11) and a corresponding AUC of 0.61. Although the QUANTEC model consistently predicted higher NTCP values, it could not be rejected according to the χ(2) test (p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Observed complications, and best-fit parameter estimates, were consistent with the QUANTEC-preferred NTCP model. However, predictive power was low, at least partly because the rectal dose distribution characteristics do not vary greatly within this patient cohort.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".