Graded-threshold parametric response maps: towards a strategy for adaptive dose painting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To modify the single-threshold parametric response map (ST-PRM) method for predicting treatment outcomes in order to facilitate its use for guidance of adaptive dose painting in intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Methods: Multiple graded thresholds were used to extend the ST-PRM method (Nat. Med. 2009;15(5):572-576) such that the full functional change distribution within tumours could be represented with respect to multiple confidence interval estimates for functional changes in similar healthy tissue. The ST-PRM and graded-threshold PRM (GT-PRM) methods were applied to functional imaging scans of 5 patients treated for hepatocellular carcinoma. Pre and post-radiotherapy arterial blood flow maps (ABF) were generated from CT-perfusion scans of each patient. ABF maps were rigidly registered based on aligning tumour centres of mass. ST-PRM and GT-PRM analyses were then performed on overlapping tumour regions within the registered ABF maps. Main findings: The ST-PRMs contained many disconnected clusters of voxels classified as having a significant change in function. While this may be useful to predict treatment response, it may pose challenges for identifying boost volumes or for informing dose-painting by numbers strategies. The GT-PRMs included all of the same information as ST-PRMs but also visualized the full tumour functional change distribution. Heterogeneous clusters in the ST-PRMs often became more connected in the GT-PRMs by voxels with similar functional changes. Conclusions: GT-PRMs provided additional information which helped to visualize relationships between significant functional changes identified by ST-PRMs. This may enhance ST-PRM utility for guiding adaptive dose painting.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".