A comparison of organs at risk doses in GYN intracavitary brachytherapy for different tandem lengths and bladder volumes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent effects of tandem length and bladder volume on dose to pelvic organs at risk (OARs) in HDR intracavitary brachytherapy treatment of cervical cancer. Twenty patients with locally advanced cervical cancer were selected for brachytherapy using Rotterdam applicators. The patients were CT scanned twice with empty and full bladder. Two treatment plans were prepared on each of the image sets. Patients were categorized into two groups; those treated with a tandem length of 4 cm or smaller (T ≤ 4 cm) and those with tandem length larger than 4 cm (T > 4 cm). Only one tandem tip angle of 30° was studied. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of OARs were calculated and compared. Bladder dose was significantly affected by both bladder volume and tandem physical length for T ≤ 4 cm. This was reflected on the values obtained for D2cm³, D1cm³, and D0.1cm³ for both empty and full bladder cases. When T > 4 cm, no correlation could be established between variations in bladder dose and blad-der volume. Rectum dose was generally lower when the bladder was empty and T > 4 cm. Dose to sigmoid was increased when T > 4 cm; this increase was larger when the bladder was full. Our results suggest that, for tandems longer than 4 cm, keeping the bladder empty may reduce the dose to rectum and sigmoid. This is contrary to cases where a shorter than 4 cm tandem is used in which a full bladder (about 50-120 cm³) tends to result in a lower dose to rectum and sigmoid. Attention should be given to doses to sigmoid with long tandem lengths, as a larger tandem generally results in a larger dose to sigmoid.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".