Evaluation of daily online set-up errors and organ displacement uncertainty during conformal radiation treatment of the prostate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have studied and analysed the magnitude of interfraction set-up errors and gold seed marker and prostate displacement in 118 patients using three gold seeds implanted within the prostate. Set-up errors and gold seed marker displacements were determined from bony anatomy and gold seed marker mismatch between the electronic portal image and the simulation digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR), respectively. Prostate displacement relative to bony anatomy was determined from the difference between gold seed marker and bony anatomy displacement. Daily online repositioning of patients was accomplished through image matching using Varian Portal-Vision software. A total of 4878 electronic portal images and 236 DRRs from 118 patients were acquired over the course of the study. The means and standard deviations of the systematic error of gold seed marker displacement of 118 patients were 2.1+/-2.7 mm for anteroposterior (AP), -0.5+/-1.7 mm for left-right (L-R), and 1.0+/-1.9 mm for superoinferior (SI) directions; the random errors were 3.2 mm (0.9-4.9 mm) for AP, 1.9 mm (0.7-5.3 mm) for L-R, and 2.1 mm (0.7-4.5 mm) for SI directions. The mean and standard deviation of the isocentre set-up systematic error of 20 patients was 1.2+/-2.2 mm for AP, -0.1+/-1.4 mm for L-R, and -0.8+/-2.6 mm for SI directions. The isocentre set-up random errors were 1.6 mm (1.2-4.8 mm) for AP, 1.3 mm (0.6-2.5 mm) for L-R and 1.3 mm (1.0-2.6 mm) for SI directions. The mean and standard deviation of the prostate displacement systematic error relative to bony anatomy was 0.0+/-1.4 mm for AP, 0.0+/-1.1 mm for L-R and -0.2+/-2.4 mm for SI directions. Prostate displacement random errors were 1.5 mm (1.2-3.3 mm) for AP, 0.9 mm (0.4-1.5 mm) for L-R and 1.4 mm (1.2-2.4 mm) for SI directions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".