MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2552583051 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/61/24/8408

Bladder accumulated dose in image-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer and its relation to urinary toxicity

2016· article· en· W2552583051 on OpenAlexafffund
Roja Zakariaee, Ghassan Hamarneh, Colin J. Brown, Marc Gaudet, Christina Aquino‐Parsons, Ingrid Spadinger

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalSimon Fraser UniversityBC Cancer Agency
FundersBC Cancer Agency
KeywordsBrachytherapyMedicineNuclear medicineCervical cancerToxicityCumulative doseUrologyUrinary bladderRadiation therapyCancerRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this study was to estimate locally accumulated dose to the bladder in multi-fraction high-dose-date (HDR) image-guided intracavitary brachytherapy (IG-ICBT) for cervical cancer, and study the locally-accumulated dose parameters as predictors of late urinary toxicity. A retrospective study of 60 cervical cancer patients who received five HDR IG-ICBT sessions was performed. The bladder outer and inner surfaces were segmented for all sessions and a bladder-wall contour point-set was created in MATLAB. The bladder-wall point-sets for each patient were registered using a deformable point-set registration toolbox called coherent point drift (CPD), and the fraction doses were accumulated. Various dosimetric and volumetric parameters were calculated using the registered doses, including r D n cm 3 (minimum dose to the most exposed n- cm 3 volume of bladder wall), r V n Gy (wall volume receiving at least m Gy), and r EQD 2 n cm 3 (minimum equivalent biologically weighted dose to the most exposed n- cm 3 of bladder wall), where n = 1/2/5/10 and m = 3/5/10. Minimum dose to contiguous 1 and 2 cm 3 hot-spot volumes was also calculated. The unregistered dose volume histogram (DVH)-summed equivalent of r D n cm 3 and r EQD 2 n cm 3 parameters (i.e. s D n cm 3

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207