MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063198351 · doi:10.1118/1.4792203

Model‐based prediction of portal dose images during patient treatment

2013· article· en· W2063198351 on OpenAlexafffund
Krista Chytyk‐Praznik, Eric VanUytven, Timothy VanBeek, Peter B. Greer, B McCurdy

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaNova Scotia Cancer CentreCancerCare Manitoba
FundersManitoba Health Research CouncilVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsImaging phantomImage-guided radiation therapyDosimetryMonte Carlo methodNuclear medicineMedical imagingFluenceRadiation treatment planningRadiation therapyMedical physicsMedicineOpticsPhysicsMathematicsRadiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Dosimetric verification of radiation therapy is crucial when delivering complex treatments like intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT. Pretreatment verification, characterized by methods applied without the patient present and before the treatment start date, is typically carried out at most centers. In vivo dosimetric verification, characterized by methods applied with the patient present, is not commonly carried out in the clinic. This work presents a novel, model-based EPID dosimetry method that could be used for routine clinical in vivo patient treatment verification. METHODS: The authors integrated a detailed fluence model with a patient scatter prediction model that uses a superposition of scatter energy fluence kernels, generated via Monte Carlo techniques, to determine patient scatter fluence delivered to the EPID. The total dose to the EPID was calculated using the sum of convolutions of the calculated energy fluence distribution entering the EPID with monoenergetic dose kernels, specific to the a-Si EPID. Measured images with simple, square fields delivered to slab phantoms were validated against predicted images. Measured and predicted images acquired during the delivery of IMRT fields to slabs and an anthropomorphic phantom were compared using the χ-comparison for 3% dose difference and 3 mm distance-to-agreement criteria. RESULTS: Predicted and measured images of the square fields with slabs in the field agreed within 2.5%. Predicted portal dose images of clinical IMRT fields delivered to slabs and an anthropomorphic phantom agreed with measured images within 3% and 3 mm for an average of at least 97% of the infield pixels (defined as >10% maximum field dose) for each case, over all fields. CONCLUSIONS: This work presents the first validation of the integration of a comprehensive fluence model with a patient and EPID radiation transport model that accounts for patient transmission, including complex factors such as patient scatter and the energy response of the a-Si detector. The portal dose image prediction model satisfies the 3% and 3 mm criteria for IMRT fields delivered to slab phantoms and could be used for patient treatment verification.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations58
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207