Delivered Dose and Vascular Response After β-Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Observations from previous intracoronary radiation therapy trials noted a considerable discrepancy between the prescribed radiation dose and the dose actually delivered. The aims of this study were to investigate the effect of actual delivered dose on vascular changes and to test the appropriateness of the current dose prescription. METHODS AND RESULTS: Serial volumetric intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) analysis was performed in 30 in-stent restenosis cases treated with a 40-mm (90)Sr/Y source train. The fixed dose was prescribed at 2 mm from the centerline of the source train (18.4 Gy at 2 mm for reference diameter < or =3.35 mm and 23 Gy for diameter > or =3.36 mm). Only stent segments with full radiation coverage and device injury were enrolled and divided into 2-mm-long subsegments (n=202). D(S90)EEM (the minimum dose absorbed by 90% of the external elastic membrane surface) was calculated as the delivered dose corresponding to each segment, assuming that the radiation catheter occupied the same position in the vessel as the IVUS catheter. Mean D(S90)EEM of 23.5+/-5.82 Gy (range 12.3 to 41.7 Gy) was delivered to these subsegments. Overall, intimal hyperplasia volume remained constant from postintervention to follow-up (2.23+/-1.10 to 2.32+/-1.09 mm3/m; P=NS). Regression analysis revealed there was no correlation between delivered dose intensity and changes in intimal hyperplasia volume. No particular dose-dependent complications were appreciated in this delivered dose range. CONCLUSIONS: The current dose-prescription protocol of (90)Sr/Y radiation to native in-stent restenosis lesions may provide substantial inhibition of neointimal reproliferation regardless of the actual delivered dose intensity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".