MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2197357450 · doi:10.1118/1.4938412

Effect of deformable registration uncertainty on lung SBRT dose accumulation

2015· article· en· W2197357450 on OpenAlexafffund
Navid Samavati, Michael Velec, Kristy K. Brock

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthOntario Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsBreathingImage registrationNuclear medicineDosimetryMedical imagingMedicineMathematicsComputer scienceRadiologyComputer visionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Deformable image registration (DIR) plays an important role in dose accumulation, such as incorporating breathing motion into the accumulation of the delivered dose based on daily 4DCBCT images. However, it is not yet well understood how the uncertainties associated with DIR methods affect the dose calculations and resulting clinical metrics. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of DIR uncertainty on the clinical metrics derived from its use in dose accumulation. METHODS: A biomechanical model based DIR method and a biomechanical-intensity-based hybrid method, which reduced the average registration error by 1.6 mm, were applied to ten lung cancer patients. A clinically relevant dose parameter [minimum dose to 0.5 cm(3) (Dmin)] was calculated for three dose scenarios using both algorithms. Dose scenarios included static (no breathing motion), predicted (breathing motion at the time of planning), and total accumulated (interfraction breathing motion). The relationship between the dose parameter and a combination of DIR uncertainty metrics, tumor volume, and dose heterogeneity of the plan was investigated. RESULTS: Depending on the dose heterogeneity, tumor volume, and DIR uncertainty, in over 50% of the patients, differences greater than 1.0 Gy were observed in the Dmin of the tumor in the static dose calculation on exhale phase of the 4DCT. Such differences were due to the errors in propagating the tumor contours from the reference planning 4DCT phase onto a subsequent 4DCT phase using each DIR algorithm and calculating the dose on that phase. The differences in predicted dose were more subtle when breathing motion was modeled explicitly at the time of planning with only one patient exhibiting a greater than 1.0 Gy difference in Dmin. Dmin differences of up to 2.5 Gy were found in the total accumulated delivered dose due to difference in quantifying the interfraction variations. Such dose uncertainties could potentially be clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in average uncertainty in DIR algorithms by 1.6 mm may have a clinically significant impact on the decision-making metrics used in dose planning and dose accumulation assessment.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations69
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207