MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807833853 · doi:10.1002/mp.13045

Establishing action threshold for change in patient anatomy using <scp>EPID</scp> gamma analysis and <scp>PTV</scp> coverage for head and neck radiotherapy treatment

2018· article· en· W2807833853 on OpenAlexaff
Piron Ophelie, Nicolas Varfalvy, Louis Archambault

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsMedicineNuclear medicineHead and neckRadiation therapyHead and neck cancerImage-guided radiation therapyRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To present a new adaptive radiotherapy (ART) method based on relative gamma analysis and patient classification for the identification of anatomical changes that induce a sufficient dosimetric impact to affect the treatment delivery and require complete replanning. METHODS: This retrospective study includes 55 patients treated for a head and neck cancer with IMRT, VMAT, or 3D conformal RT. Electronic Portal Imaging Device images for all treatment fields were acquired daily at every fraction. CBCTs were collected at least once a week. Gamma analysis was performed using the first fraction of the treatment as a reference once validated that it was delivered without error. Gamma analysis parameters (<γ>, standard deviation and the Top 1% γ) were used to define categories using statistic from a k-means clustering analysis. From these categories an action threshold was defined and correlated with dosimetric changes. For 23 of 55 patients, the V100% for PTV was computed for both, the planning CT and original contours deformed onto CBCT acquired at the last fraction. These values were then compared with 2D image relative γ-analysis of EPID images. Sensitivity and specificity of the method for the detection of dosimetric changes were computed. RESULTS: Three categories indicating an increasing level of change with the planned treatment were identified. A threshold was established for which patients were at risk of deviation at <γ> = 0.42. From 23 recomputing plans, it has been confirmed that patients with a strong dosimetric impact were above this threshold, with a specificity of 0.80 and a sensitivity of 0.84. CONCLUSIONS: The specificity and the sensitivity value confirmed the performance of the method to detect anatomical changes. The γ-analysis threshold correlated well with morphological changes that have a relevant dosimetric impact. Analysis of daily EPID images provides a method to identify patients at risk of deviation from their planned treatment and can support an early replanning decision.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207