MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344601809 · doi:10.1118/1.4947295

Continuous monitoring of prostate position using stereoscopic and monoscopic kV image guidance

2016· article· en· W2344601809 on OpenAlexaff
M. Tynan R. Stevens, David Parsons, James L. Robar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Cancer CentreDalhousie University
FundersVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsFiducial markerStereoscopyImaging phantomComputer visionNuclear medicineImage-guided radiation therapyArtificial intelligenceFluoroscopyComputer scienceMedical imagingMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To demonstrate continuous kV x-ray monitoring of prostate motion using both stereoscopic and monoscopic localizations, assess the spatial accuracy of these techniques, and evaluate the dose delivered from the added image guidance. METHODS: The authors implemented both stereoscopic and monoscopic fiducial localizations using a room-mounted dual oblique x-ray system. Recently developed monoscopic 3D position estimation techniques potentially overcome the issue of treatment head interference with stereoscopic imaging at certain gantry angles. To demonstrate continuous position monitoring, a gold fiducial marker was placed in an anthropomorphic phantom and placed on the Linac couch. The couch was used as a programmable translation stage. The couch was programmed with a series of patient prostate motion trajectories exemplifying five distinct categories: stable prostate, slow drift, persistent excursion, transient excursion, and high frequency excursions. The phantom and fiducial were imaged using 140 kVp, 0.63 mAs per image at 1 Hz for a 60 s monitoring period. Both stereoscopic and monoscopic 3D localization accuracies were assessed by comparison to the ground-truth obtained from the Linac log file. Imaging dose was also assessed, using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter inserts in the phantom. RESULTS: Stereoscopic localization accuracy varied between 0.13 ± 0.05 and 0.33 ± 0.30 mm, depending on the motion trajectory. Monoscopic localization accuracy varied from 0.2 ± 0.1 to 1.1 ± 0.7 mm. The largest localization errors were typically observed in the left-right direction. There were significant differences in accuracy between the two monoscopic views, but which view was better varied from trajectory to trajectory. The imaging dose was measured to be between 2 and 15 μGy/mAs, depending on location in the phantom. CONCLUSIONS: The authors have demonstrated the first use of monoscopic localization for a room-mounted dual x-ray system. Three-dimensional position estimation from monoscopic imaging permits continuous, uninterrupted intrafraction motion monitoring even in the presence of gantry rotation, which may block kV sources or imagers. This potentially allows for more accurate treatment delivery, by ensuring that the prostate does not deviate substantially from the initial setup position.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207