MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343161910 · doi:10.1118/1.4947486

Improved tissue assignment using dual-energy computed tomography in low-dose rate prostate brachytherapy for Monte Carlo dose calculation

2016· article· en· W2343161910 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Côté, Stéphane Bedwani, Jean‐François Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHounsfield scaleVoxelMonte Carlo methodNuclear medicineDigital Enhanced Cordless TelecommunicationsBrachytherapyEffective atomic numberMathematicsAlgorithmPhysicsComputer scienceMedicineComputed tomographyAtomic numberRadiation therapyArtificial intelligenceRadiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: An improvement in tissue assignment for low-dose rate brachytherapy (LDRB) patients using more accurate Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation was accomplished with a metallic artifact reduction (MAR) method specific to dual-energy computed tomography (DECT). METHODS: The proposed MAR algorithm followed a four-step procedure. The first step involved applying a weighted blend of both DECT scans (I H/L) to generate a new image (I Mix). This action minimized Hounsfield unit (HU) variations surrounding the brachytherapy seeds. In the second step, the mean HU of the prostate in I Mix was calculated and shifted toward the mean HU of the two original DECT images (I H/L). The third step involved smoothing the newly shifted I Mix and the two original I H/L, followed by a subtraction of both, generating an image that represented the metallic artifact (I A,(H/L)) of reduced noise levels. The final step consisted of subtracting the original I H/L from the newly generated I A,(H/L) and obtaining a final image corrected for metallic artifacts. Following the completion of the algorithm, a DECT stoichiometric method was used to extract the relative electronic density (ρe) and effective atomic number (Z eff) at each voxel of the corrected scans. Tissue assignment could then be determined with these two newly acquired physical parameters. Each voxel was assigned the tissue bearing the closest resemblance in terms of ρe and Z eff, comparing with values from the ICRU 42 database. A MC study was then performed to compare the dosimetric impacts of alternative MAR algorithms. RESULTS: An improvement in tissue assignment was observed with the DECT MAR algorithm, compared to the single-energy computed tomography (SECT) approach. In a phantom study, tissue misassignment was found to reach 0.05% of voxels using the DECT approach, compared with 0.40% using the SECT method. Comparison of the DECT and SECT D 90 dose parameter (volume receiving 90% of the dose) indicated that D 90 could be underestimated by up to 2.3% using the SECT method. CONCLUSIONS: The DECT MAR approach is a simple alternative to reduce metallic artifacts found in LDRB patient scans. Images can be processed quickly and do not require the determination of x-ray spectra. Substantial information on density and atomic number can also be obtained. Furthermore, calcifications within the prostate are detected by the tissue assignment algorithm. This enables more accurate, patient-specific MC dose calculations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207