76: IMRT for Vulvar Carcinoma: Changes in Practice Over 5 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ cardiac four-dimensional CT (4D-CT) synchronized to the electrocardiogram were obtained in treatment position, using a prospective sequential acquisition method including the extreme phases of systole and diastole.On a MimVista® image registration workstation, dose distributions were transferred to the cardiac 4D-CT.The left coronary artery, left ventricle and heart were contoured on both phases of the cardiac cycle.The maximum and minimum doses to the left coronary, left ventricle and heart were compared using a bilateral paired Student T test.Results: Preliminary data from the first eight patients enrolled are presented.Median age was 60 years (56-71) and median planned dose to the left breast was 42.56 Gy (42.56-50) in 16 fractions (16-20).For the left coronary artery, mean dose, V5 and V20 in systole versus diastole were 6.1 Gy versus 7.9 Gy (p = 0.02), 37% versus 48% (p = 0.02) and 10% versus 16% (p = 0.04), respectively.For the left ventricle, mean dose, V5 and V20 in systole versus diastole were 1.3 Gy versus 1.6 Gy (p = 0.005), 6% versus 9% (p = 0.03) and 1% versus 2% (p > 0.1), respectively.For the whole heart, mean dose, V5 and V20 in systole versus diastole were 0.9 Gy versus 1.3 Gy (p = 0.005), 21 cc versus 32 cc (p = 0.07) and 4 cc versus 5 cc (p > 0.1), respectively.Conclusions: Beyond DIBH, systolic irradiation would be associated with a further reduction in V5, V20 and mean dose to the left coronary artery, as well as a reduction in V5 and mean dose to the left ventricle and heart as a whole.The potential clinical impact of this reduction as well as the feasibility of cardiac gated irradiation are to be further investigated.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".