MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2581292847 · doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(15)40766-2

PO-0774: Optimal beam quality for Linac-based Spatially Fractionated Grid Radiation Therapy (SFGRT)

2015· article· en· W2581292847 on OpenAlexaff
L Liang, Hamed Bekerat, Nada Tomic, F DeBlois, T. Vuong, Slobodan Dević, Ahmad Nobah, Majid Mohiuddin, Belal Moftah

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiotherapy and Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear particle acceleratorRadiation therapyBeam (structure)Nuclear medicineQuality (philosophy)External beam radiationMedical physicsRadiationLaser beam qualityGridMedicineOpticsPhysicsRadiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose/Objective: Most of contemporary efforts to incorporate functional information into radiotherapy treatment planning are based on an attempt to replace CT/MRI-based GTV with PET based GTV.Functional information might also be used to define a sub-volume within CT-based GTV [Ling et al., Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;47:551-60], a method called dose painting by contours (DPBC).Instead, PET data was suggested to be used to gradually shape dose according to voxel intensities [Bentzen, Lancet Oncol 2005;6:112-7], a method called dose painting by numbers (DPBN).We discuss possibilities of these two alternatives in regards to differential uptake volume histogram method we developed to segment FDG-based biological sub-volumes on a cohort of 31 NSCLC patients that underwent PET/CT scan prior to surgery.Materials and Methods: Background uptake in PET scan was defined as weighted mean over FDG uptake values within contra-lateral healthy lung through slices containing the tumor, and then scaled by factor of 3 to account for the difference in tissue density between healthy lung and solid tumor.Each PET slice raw data was divided by the background uptake to obtain local signal-to-background ratio (S/B) images.By sampling a region of interest containing the tumor on S/B images, an uptake volume histogram was constructed and then decomposed for each patient (Fig. 1.a).Results: Distinct volumes were observed in uptake volume histograms and fitted using composition of six Gaussians.We hypothesize that they may represent different physiological regions within tumor (Fig. 1. b).Threshold values for these volumes are found by cross-section of corresponding fitted Gaussian curves (Fig.1.a).Immunohistopathological correlations to these sub-volumes are necessary to validate the method.The highest uptake sub-volume (named 'glycolytic BTV,' by hypothesis only) may consist of both well aerated regions (due to Warburg effect) as well as hypoxic regions (Fig. 1.c) and boost to higher doses might be considered clinically viable within DPBC method.On the other hand, use of DPBN and delivering low dose to the central section of the tumor may lead to undesired outcomes as the 'necrotic' tissue certainly lacks oxygen.By contrast, one may also consider delivering a high dose to 'necrotic' BTV to prevent possible recurrence by dormant cells under severe hypoxia.Conclusions: Multiple biological target volumes might be derived on a patient-to-patient basis.This concept is in synergy with a contemporary custom-made patient-specific oncologic treatment planning philosophy.However, at the microscopic level it is not possible to define a sharp cut-off separating one biological phenotype from another.One has to keep in mind that any biological target volume (Fig. 1. d) could be only defined as abundance rather than a distinct volume containing one and only one biological phenotype.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRadiotherapy and OncologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207