MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2514939875 · doi:10.1118/1.4961851

Sci‐Fri PM: Radiation Therapy, Planning, Imaging, and Special Techniques ‐ 08: Retrospective Dose Accumulation Workflow in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Using RayStation 4.5.2

2016· article· en· W2514939875 on OpenAlexaff
Olive Wong, Biu Chan, Joanne Moseley, Andrea McNiven, Patricia Lindsay, Jean‐Pierre Bissonnette, John Waldron, Meredith Giuliani, Beibei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage registrationMedicineRadiation treatment planningHead and neck cancerWorkflowDosimetryNuclear medicineRadiation therapyCone beam computed tomographyMedical imagingMedical physicsImage-guided radiation therapyRadiologyComputer scienceComputed tomographyArtificial intelligenceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: We have developed a semi‐automated dose accumulation workflow for Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients to evaluate volumetric and dosimetric changes that take place during radiotherapy. This work will be used to assess how dosimetric changes affect both toxicity and disease control, hence inform the feasibility and design of a prospective HNC adaptive trial. Methods: RayStation 4.5.2 features deformable image registration (DIR), where structures already defined on the planning CT image set can be deformably mapped onto cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) images, accounting for daily treatment set‐up shifts and changes in patient anatomy. The daily delivered dose can be calculated on each CBCT and mapped back to the planning CT to allow dose accumulation. The process is partially automated using Python scripts developed in collaboration with RaySearch. Results: To date we have performed dose accumulation on 18 HNC patients treated at our institution during 2013–2015 under REB approval. Our semi‐automated process establishes clinical feasibility. Generally, dose accumulation for the entire treatment course of one case takes 60–120 minutes: importing all CBCTs requires 20–30 minutes as each patient has 30 to 40 treated fractions; image registration and dose accumulation require 60–90 minutes. This is in contrast to the process without automated scripts where dose accumulation alone would take 3–5 hours. Conclusions: We have developed a reliable workflow for retrospective dose tracking in HNC using RayStation. The process has been validated for HNC patients treated on both Elekta and Varian linacs with CBCTs acquired on XVI and OBI platforms respectively.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.031

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designObservational
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→