MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619532757 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ac344d

Emerging technologies in brachytherapy

2021· review· en· W2619532757 on OpenAlexaff
William Y. Song, James L. Robar, Björn Morén, Torbjörn Larsson, Åsa Carlsson Tedgren, Xun Jia

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCancerfondenVetenskapsrådetViewRayVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsBrachytherapyWorkflowComputer scienceEmerging technologiesModality (human–computer interaction)Medical physicsSystems engineeringEngineering managementMedicineArtificial intelligenceEngineeringRadiation therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Brachytherapy is a mature treatment modality. The literature is abundant in terms of review articles and comprehensive books on the latest established as well as evolving clinical practices. The intent of this article is to part ways and look beyond the current state-of-the-art and review emerging technologies that are noteworthy and perhaps may drive the future innovations in the field. There are plenty of candidate topics that deserve a deeper look, of course, but with practical limits in this communicative platform, we explore four topics that perhaps is worthwhile to review in detail at this time. First, intensity modulated brachytherapy (IMBT) is reviewed. The IMBT takes advantage of anisotropic radiation profile generated through intelligent high-density shielding designs incorporated onto sources and applicators such to achieve high quality plans. Second, emerging applications of 3D printing (i.e. additive manufacturing) in brachytherapy are reviewed. With the advent of 3D printing, interest in this technology in brachytherapy has been immense and translation swift due to their potential to tailor applicators and treatments customizable to each individual patient. This is followed by, in third, innovations in treatment planning concerning catheter placement and dwell times where new modelling approaches, solution algorithms, and technological advances are reviewed. And, fourth and lastly, applications of a new machine learning technique, called deep learning, which has the potential to improve and automate all aspects of brachytherapy workflow, are reviewed. We do not expect that all ideas and innovations reviewed in this article will ultimately reach clinic but, nonetheless, this review provides a decent glimpse of what is to come. It would be exciting to monitor as IMBT, 3D printing, novel optimization algorithms, and deep learning technologies evolve over time and translate into pilot testing and sensibly phased clinical trials, and ultimately make a difference for cancer patients. Today’s fancy is tomorrow’s reality. The future is bright for brachytherapy.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207