MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A prone technique for treatment of the breast, supraclavicular and axillary nodes

2012· article· en· W2145998233 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicole Mason, Deborah F. MacFarlane, Robyn Guidi, Rebecca Owen, Michael Poulsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProne positionSupine positionMedicineNuclear medicineDosimetryReproducibilityAxillary linesRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiation therapy to women with large pendulous breasts presents dosimetric challenges when the whole breast (WB) and supraclavicular and axillary (SCF + AX) nodes need to be encompassed. The aim of this case study was to demonstrate the feasibility of planning and treating a pendulous breasted patient in the prone position. Computerised tomography (CT) images were acquired of the patient in both the prone and supine positions. A Perspex plate was added to the CDR Systems Inc. (Calgary, Canada) prone breastboard to minimize SCF + AX contour variations. Dosimetry was performed on both CT scans and the resultant treatment plans were evaluated for conformity, homogeneity, dose to the lung and maximum doses to the spinal cord (SC) and irradiated volume. The daily set-up in the prone position was monitored for stability and reproducibility. The patient completed her treatment course in the prone position. Minimal daily interventions were required to ensure the position was reproduced. Grade 3 skin toxicity was recorded in the SCF + AX region where the Perspex plate was added to the prone positioning device. There was minimal difference in dosimetry between prone and supine plans in the SCF + AX region. The prone WB plan showed improved homogeneity (prone 0.15; supine 0.22) and conformity (prone 0.90; supine 0.77). A simple addition to the breastboard has enabled a pendulous breasted woman with SC + AX involvement to be treated in the prone position. Set-up of this technique is achievable on a daily basis with minimal impact on workflow. It is a feasible alternative to supine treatment for this patient group.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Imaging and Radiation OncologySame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207