Dosimetric and radiobiological impact of abdominal compression on adjacent gastro-intestinal critical structures for patients treated with upper and mid-abdominal stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the dosimetric and radiobiological impact of abdominal compression (AC) on nearby gastrointestinal critical structures (GI-CS) and reported toxicities of patients treated with non-hepatic abdominal stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). METHODS: Two sets of CT scans, planning scans with AC and pre-treatment diagnostic scans without AC (non-AC) were compared for patients treated with a prescription dose to planning target volume (PTV) ≥25 Gy/5-fractions at a single institution. Target volumes were delineated on both sets of scans and PTV was expanded isotropically by 2 cm (PTV+2) and 4 cm (PTV+4). All GI-CS were summated to create a composite CS (GI-lumen). Rigid registration of AC and non-AC scans was done using Velocity AI (Varian Medical Systems) to obtain dose distribution information. Lymann-Probit and logit models were used for radiobiological calculations. Toxicity scores were obtained from prospectively collected clinical data. RESULTS: A total of 12 patients were included. Mean PTV volumes were 190.3cc and 196.4cc with AC and non-AC (p=0.95). Significant improvement in V30 of GI-lumen was seen with AC (0.11cc vs. 4.97cc, p=0.04). There were no differences in the normal tissue complication probabilities of the individual GI-CS or the summary indices except a notable trend towards better NTCP for small bowel late effects with AC (0.21% vs. 2.45%; p=0.055). Three patients had acute grade-1 anorexia, one patient had acute grade-2 gastritis. There was no grade ≥3 GI toxicity. At a median follow-up of 2.6 years, total of 8/12 (66.7%) patients developed local recurrence of whom 4 (33.3%) had isolated local recurrence. CONCLUSION: Use of AC did not result in any dosimetric or radiobiological inferiority for GI-CS. The current cohort completed their treatment with minimal toxicity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".