MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2466714534 · doi:10.1118/1.4957298

MO-FG-BRA-05: Dosimetric and Radiobiological Validation of Respiratory Gating in Conventional and Hypofractionated Radiotherapy of the Lung: Effect of Dose, Dose Rate, Gating Window and Breathing Pattern

2016· article· en· W2466714534 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Cerviño, D. Soultan, Niclas Pettersson, Adam D. Yock, M. Cornell, José Miguel Aguilera, James D. Murphy, B.S. Gill, Sunil J. Advani, Vitali Moiseenko

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonization chamberNuclear medicineGatingImaging phantomDosimetryBreathingMedicineRadiation therapyRadiologyPhysicsIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: to evaluate the dosimetric and radiobiological consequences from having different gating windows, dose rates, and breathing patterns in gated VMAT lung radiotherapy. Methods: A novel 3D-printed moving phantom with central high and peripheral low tracer uptake regions was 4D FDG-PET/CT-scanned using ideal, patient-specific regular, and irregular breathing patterns. A scan of the stationary phantom was obtained as a reference. Target volumes corresponding to different uptake regions were delineated. Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) 6 MV VMAT plans were produced for conventional and hypofractionated radiotherapy, using 30–70 and 100% cycle gating scenarios. Prescribed doses were 200 cGy with SIB to 240 cGy to high uptake volume for conventional, and 800 with SIB to 900 cGy for hypofractionated plans. Dose rates of 600 MU/min (conventional and hypofractionated) and flattening filter free 1400 MU/min (hypofractionated) were used. Ion chamber measurements were performed to verify delivered doses. Vials with A549 cells placed in locations matching ion chamber measurements were irradiated using the same plans to measure clonogenic survival. Differences in survival for the different doses, dose rates, gating windows, and breathing patterns were analyzed. Results: Ion chamber measurements agreed within 3% of the planned dose, for all locations, breathing patterns and gating windows. Cell survival depended on dose alone, and not on gating window, breathing pattern, MU rate, or delivery time. The surviving fraction varied from approximately 40% at 2Gy to 1% for 9 Gy and was within statistical uncertainty relative to that observed for the stationary phantom. Conclusions: Use of gated VMAT in PET-driven SIB radiotherapy was validated using ion chamber measurements and cell survival assays for conventional and hypofractionated radiotherapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.282
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→