A serial 4DCT study to quantify range variations in charged particle radiotherapy of thoracic cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weekly serial 4DCT scans were acquired under free breathing conditions to assess water-equivalent path length (WEL) variations due to both intrafractional and interfractional changes in tissue thickness and density and to calculate proton dose distributions resulting from anatomical variations observed in serial 4DCT. A template of region of interests (ROIs) was defined on the anterior-posterior (AP) beam's eye view, and WEL measurements were made over these ROIs to quantify chest wall thickness variations. Interfractional proton dose distributions were calculated to assess changes in the expected dose distributions caused by range variations. Mean intrafractional chest wall WEL changes during respiration varied by: -4.1 mm (<-10.2 mm), -3.6 mm (<-7.1 mm), -3.2 mm (<-5.6 mm) and -2.5 mm (<-5.1 mm) during respiration in the ITV, upper, middle and lower lung regions, respectively. The mean interfractional chest wall WEL variation at Week 6 decreased by -4.0 mm (<-8.6 mm), -9.1 mm (<-17.9 mm), -9.4 mm (<-25.3 mm) and -4.5 mm (<-15.6 mm) in the ITV, upper, middle and lower lung regions, respectively. The variations were decomposed into anterior and posterior chest wall thickness changes. Dose overshoot beyond the target was observed when the initial boli was applied throughout the treatment course. This overshoot is due to chest wall thickness variations and target positional variations. The radiological path length can vary significantly during respiration as well as over the course of several weeks of charged particle therapy. Intrafractional/interfractional chest wall thickness changes can be a significant source of range variation in treatment of lung tumors with charged particle beams, resulting in dose distribution perturbations from the initial plan. Consideration of these range variations should be made in choosing the therapeutic charged particle beam range.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".