MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2009999904 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/14/3749

Influence of image slice thickness on rectal dose–response relationships following radiotherapy of prostate cancer

2014· article· en· W2009999904 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Olsson, Maria Thor, M Liu, V. Moissenko, Stine E. Petersen, Morten Høyer, Aditya Apte, Joseph O. Deasy

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer InstituteStiftelsen Assar Gabrielssons FondCancerfonden
KeywordsRectumNuclear medicineProstateMedicineProstate cancerRadiation therapyRadiation treatment planningRadiologyCancerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When pooling retrospective data from different cohorts, slice thicknesses of acquired computed tomography (CT) images used for treatment planning may vary between cohorts. It is, however, not known if varying slice thickness influences derived dose-response relationships. We investigated this for rectal bleeding using dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of the rectum and rectal wall for dose distributions superimposed on images with varying CT slice thicknesses. We used dose and endpoint data from two prostate cancer cohorts treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to either 74 Gy (N = 159) or 78 Gy (N = 159) at 2 Gy per fraction. The rectum was defined as the whole organ with content, and the morbidity cut-off was Grade ≥2 late rectal bleeding. Rectal walls were defined as 3 mm inner margins added to the rectum. DVHs for simulated slice thicknesses from 3 to 13 mm were compared to DVHs for the originally acquired slice thicknesses at 3 and 5 mm. Volumes, mean, and maximum doses were assessed from the DVHs, and generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) values were calculated. For each organ and each of the simulated slice thicknesses, we performed predictive modeling of late rectal bleeding using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) model. For the most coarse slice thickness, rectal volumes increased (≤18%), whereas maximum and mean doses decreased (≤0.8 and ≤4.2 Gy, respectively). For all a values, the gEUD for the simulated DVHs were ≤1.9 Gy different than the gEUD for the original DVHs. The best-fitting LKB model parameter values with 95% CIs were consistent between all DVHs. In conclusion, we found that the investigated slice thickness variations had minimal impact on rectal dose-response estimations. From the perspective of predictive modeling, our results suggest that variations within 10 mm in slice thickness between cohorts are unlikely to be a limiting factor when pooling multi-institutional rectal dose data that include slice thickness variations within this range.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→