MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028584210 · doi:10.1118/1.4889518

WE‐G‐18A‐07: Clinical Evaluation of Normalized Metal Artifact Reduction in KVCT Using MVCT Prior Images (MVCT‐NMAR) Technique in Radiotherapy

2014· article· en· W2028584210 on OpenAlexaffabout
Moti Paudel, M. Mackenzie, B. G. Fallone, S Rathee

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTomotherapyMedicineArtifact (error)Nuclear medicineRadiation treatment planningScannerReduction (mathematics)Medical imagingRadiation therapyRadiologyComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To evaluate the metal artifacts in diagnostic kVCT images of patients that are corrected using a normalized metal artifact reduction method with MVCT prior images, MVCT‐NMAR. Methods: An MVCTNMAR algorithm was developed and applied to five patients: three with bilateral hip prostheses, one with unilateral hip prosthesis and one with dental fillings. The corrected images were evaluated for visualization of tissue structures and their interfaces, and for radiotherapy dose calculations. They were also compared against the corresponding images corrected by a commercial metal artifact reduction technique, O‐MAR, on a Phillips™ CT scanner. Results: The use of MVCT images for correcting kVCT images in the MVCT‐NMAR technique greatly reduces metal artifacts, avoids secondary artifacts, and makes patient images more useful for correct dose calculation in radiotherapy. These improvements are significant over the commercial correction method, provided the MVCT and kVCT images are correctly registered. The remaining and the secondary artifacts (soft tissue blurring, eroded bones, false bones or air pockets, CT number cupping within the metal) present in O‐MAR corrected images are removed in the MVCT‐NMAR corrected images. Large dose reduction is possible outside the planning target volume (e.g., 59.2 Gy in comparison to 52.5 Gy in pubic bone) when these MVCT‐NMAR corrected images are used in TomoTherapy™ treatment plans, as the corrected images no longer require directional blocks for prostate plans in order to avoid the image artifact regions. Conclusion: The use of MVCT‐NMAR corrected images in radiotherapy treatment planning could improve the treatment plan quality for cancer patients with metallic implants. Moti Raj Paudel is supported by the Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship, the Endowed Graduate Scholarship in Oncology and the Dissertation Fellowship at the University of Alberta. The authors acknowledge the CIHR operating grant number MOP 53254.

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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207