MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2045926198 · doi:10.1118/1.4814035

SU-D-141-04: Patient-Specific EPID Based High Resolution 3D VMAT QA

2013· article· en· W2045926198 on OpenAlexaff
Sam Nicol, C Furstoss, E. P. Münger, W Wierzbicki

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear medicinePinnacleRadiation treatment planningDetectorLinear particle acceleratorMedicinePhysicsOpticsBeam (structure)Radiation therapyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Existing commercial 2D/3D array detectors for patient-specific VMAT QA are not suitable for stereotactic plans because of the poor spatial resolution of the embedded detectors. A pre-treatment QA method was developed to perform a complete 3D patient dose analysis of stereotactic VMAT plans using Sun Nuclear 3DVH software and a high resolution EPID detector in cine acquisition mode. Methods: Cine images are acquired continuously during the irradiation with the EPID panel while the delivery is monitored using the iCom messaging interface from Elekta linear accelerators to record the gantry angle and the delivered monitor units as a function of time. Then, acquired greyscale snapshots of the MLC apertures can be correlated to their associated gantry angles and converted into absolute dose. According to the sampling desired, the control points of the treatment plan are interpolated to produce planar dose maps at angles corresponding to those at which images were acquired. Disagreement between measured and calculated dose maps can be evaluated and the delivered dose distribution in the patient can be reconstructed by perturbing the calculated dose using errors detected in planar dose measurements (3DVH Planned Dose Perturbation algorithm). Results: Several stereotactic brain and lung plans from Pinnacle were analyzed using this method. Regarding the agreement between measured and calculated dose maps, the average passing rate for a 2%-2mm gamma criterion (threshold = 5%) is close to 97% ± 3%. The complete 3D patient dose analysis showed good agreement between treatment planning system and 3DVH dose volume histograms for both targets and organs at risk. Conclusion: In this study, we developed a practical approach based on EPID cine acquisition mode and the Elekta iCom interface to perform stereotactic VMAT QA. This approach takes advantage of the high spatial resolution of EPID panels to achieve an appropriate and accurate independent QA.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→