MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134621831 · doi:10.1120/jacmp.v8i1.2286

Effect of bladder filling on doses to prostate and organs at risk: a treatment planning study

2007· article· en· W2134621831 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRectumProstateMedicineRadiation therapyUrinary bladderNuclear medicineUrologyProstate cancerRadiation treatment planningRadiologySurgeryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, we aimed to evaluate effects of bladder filling on dose-volume distributions for bladder, rectum, planning target volume (PTV), and prostate in radiation therapy of prostate cancer. Patients (n = 21) were scanned with a full bladder, and after 1 hour, having been allowed to void, with an empty bladder. Radiotherapy plans were generated using a four-field box technique and dose of 70 Gy in 35 fractions. First, plans obtained for full- and empty-bladder scans were compared. Second, situations in which a patient was planned on full bladder but was treated on empty bladder, and vice versa, were simulated, assuming that patients were aligned to external tattoos. Doses to the prostate [equivalent uniform dose (EUD)], bladder and rectum [effective dose (Deff)], and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were compared. Dose to the small bowel was examined. Mean bladder volume was 354.3 cm3 when full and 118.2 cm3 when empty. Median prostate EUD was 70 Gy for plans based on full- and empty-bladder scans alike. The median rectal Deff was 55.6 Gy for full-bladder anatomy and 56.8 Gy for empty-bladder anatomy, and the corresponding bladder Deff was 29.0 Gy and 49.3 Gy respectively. In 1 patient, part of the small bowel (7.5 cm3) received more than 50 Gy with full-bladder anatomy, and in 6 patients, part (2.5 cm3-30 cm3) received more than 50 Gy with empty-bladder anatomy. Bladder filling had no significant impact on prostate EUD or rectal Deff. A minimal volume of the small bowel received more than 50 Gy in both groups, which is below dose tolerance. The bladder Deff was higher with empty-bladder anatomy; however, the predicted complication rates were clinically insignificant. When the multileaf collimator pattern was applied in reverse, substantial underdosing of the planning target volume (PTV) was observed, particularly for patients with prostate shifts in excess of 0.5 cm in any one direction. However, the prostate shifts showed no correlation with bladder filling, and therefore the PTV underdosing also cannot be related to bladder filling. For some patients, bladder dose-volume constraints were not fulfilled in the worst-case scenario-that is, when a patient planned with full bladder consistently arrived for treatment with an empty bladder.

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.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.373 · 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