Time-Resolved Versus Integrated Transit Planar Dosimetry for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is desirable that dosimetric deviations during radiation treatments are detected. Integrated transit planar dosimetry is commonly used to evaluate external beam treatments such as volumetric-modulated arc therapy. This work focuses on patient geometry changes which result in differences between the planned and the delivered radiation dose. Integrated transit planar dosimetry will average out some deviations. Novel time-resolved transit planar dosimetry compares the delivered dose of volumetric-modulated arc therapy to the planned dose at various time points. Four patient cases are shown where time-resolved transit planar dosimetry detects patient geometry changes during treatment. METHODS: A control point to control point comparison between the planned dose and the treatment dose of volumetric-modulated arc therapy beams is calculated using the planning computed tomography and the kV cone-beam computed tomography of the day and evaluated with a time-resolved γ function. Results were computed for 4 patients treated with volumetric-modulated arc therapy, each showing an anatomical change: pleural effusion, rectal gas pockets, and tumor regression. RESULTS: In all cases, the geometrical change was detected by time-resolved transit planar dosimetry, whereas integrated transit planar dosimetry showed minor or no indication of the dose discrepancy. Both tumor regression cases were detected earlier in the treatment with time-resolved planar dosimetry in comparison to integrated transit planar dosimetry. The pleural effusion and the gas pocket were detected exclusively with time-resolved transit planar dosimetry. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical cases were presented in this proof-of-principle study in which integrated transit planar dosimetry did not detect dosimetrically relevant deviations to the same extent time-resolved transit planar dosimetry was able to. Time-resolved transit planar dosimetry also provides results that can be presented as a function of arc delivery angle allowing easier interpretation compared to integrated transit planar dosimetry.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".