MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608324915 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/aa6b5b

A particle filter motion prediction algorithm based on an autoregressive model for real-time MRI-guided radiotherapy of lung cancer

2017· article· en· W2608324915 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra E Bourque, Jean‐François Carrier, Édith Filion, Stéphane Bedwani

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive modelLung cancerRadiation therapyComputer scienceParticle filterFilter (signal processing)Motion (physics)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMedicineMathematicsRadiologyComputer visionOncologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work introduces a 2D motion prediction algorithm for lung tumors applied to dynamic MR images that combines intrafractional tumor deformations. It is developed in the context of MR-linac treatments and evaluates uniform and patient-specific margins about the gross tumor volume to optimize the tumor coverage. Seven early stage non-small cell lung cancer patients were imaged in treatment position with a 1.5 T magnetic resonance using a balanced steady-state free precession sequence for one minute at a rate of four images per second and were instructed to breathe normally. The particle filter, in combination with the autoregressive model, is used to sequentially track and predict the tumor position 250 ms in the future from the current image. In addition, the autocontour extracted from a previous study (Bourque et al 2016 Med. Phys. 43 5161–9) is projected to the predicted position and various margins are evaluated. Averaged over all patients, the root mean square errors are (1.3 ± 0.5) mm and (2.0 ± 0.8) mm with and without prediction, respectively, and the difference in centroid position is (1.1 ± 0.4) mm with the prediction. The addition of the prediction algorithm leads to inferior errors for all cases. With such predictor, enlarging the propagated contour by a uniform 2 mm margin leads to a minimum recall of 97% over the entire patient population. Considering patient-specific margins based on 2 σ of the Gaussian distribution around the mean error, the margins vary from 0.8 to 3.0 mm in anterior–posterior direction and from 1.2 to 3.2 mm in the superior–inferior direction. This study concludes that the advantage of such prediction algorithm highly depends on the tumor motion characteristics. For both uniform and patient-specific margins evaluation, smaller treatment margins could be used when combined to an accurate tracking and motion prediction algorithm. These results could offer guidance for future MR-guided lung tumor treatments.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Physics & Engineering ExpressSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207