MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056750351 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/50/5/007

Head-and-neck IMRT treatments assessed with a Monte Carlo dose calculation engine

2005· article· en· W2056750351 on OpenAlexaff
Joao Seco, Elizabeth Adams, Margaret Bidmead, Mike Partridge, Frank Verhaegen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomQuality assuranceMonte Carlo methodHead and neckNuclear medicineLinear particle acceleratorMedicineRadiation therapyMedical physicsMonitor unitRadiologyPhysicsMathematicsBeam (structure)OpticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMRT is frequently used in the head-and-neck region, which contains materials of widely differing densities (soft tissue, bone, air-cavities). Conventional methods of dose computation for these complex, inhomogeneous IMRT cases involve significant approximations. In the present work, a methodology for the development, commissioning and implementation of a Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation engine for intensity modulated radiotherapy (MC-IMRT) is proposed which can be used by radiotherapy centres interested in developing MC-IMRT capabilities for research or clinical evaluations. The method proposes three levels for developing, commissioning and maintaining a MC-IMRT dose calculation engine: (a) development of a MC model of the linear accelerator, (b) validation of MC model for IMRT and (c) periodic quality assurance (QA) of the MC-IMRT system. The first step, level (a), in developing an MC-IMRT system is to build a model of the linac that correctly predicts standard open field measurements for percentage depth-dose and off-axis ratios. Validation of MC-IMRT, level (b), can be performed in a rando phantom and in a homogeneous water equivalent phantom. Ultimately, periodic quality assurance of the MC-IMRT system is needed to verify the MC-IMRT dose calculation system, level (c). Once the MC-IMRT dose calculation system is commissioned it can be applied to more complex clinical IMRT treatments. The MC-IMRT system implemented at the Royal Marsden Hospital was used for IMRT calculations for a patient undergoing treatment for primary disease with nodal involvement in the head-and-neck region (primary treated to 65 Gy and nodes to 54 Gy), while sparing the spinal cord, brain stem and parotid glands. Preliminary MC results predict a decrease of approximately 1-2 Gy in the median dose of both the primary tumour and nodal volumes (compared with both pencil beam and collapsed cone). This is possibly due to the large air-cavity (the larynx of the patient) situated in the centre of the primary PTV and the approximations present in the dose calculation.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 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

Citations48
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207