Impact of Peritumoral Edema During Tumor Treatment Field Therapy: A Computational Modelling Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tumor treatment fields (TTFie-lds) are an approved adjuvant therapy for glioblastoma (GBM). The magnitude of applied electrical field has been shown to be related to the anti-tumoral response. However, peritumoral edema may result in shunting of electrical current around the tumor, thereby reducing the intra-tumoral electric field. In this study, we systematically address this issue with computational simulations. METHODS: Finite element models are created of a human head with varying amounts of peritumoral edema surrounding a virtual tumor. The electric field distribution was simulated using the standard TTFields electrode montage. Electric field magnitude was extracted from the tumor and related to edema thickness. Two patient specific models were created to confirm these results. RESULTS: The inclusion of peritumoral edema decreased the average magnitude of the electric field within the tumor. In the model considering a frontal tumor and an anterior-posterior electrode configuration, ≥6 mm of peritumoral edema decreased the electric field by 52%. In the patient specific models, peritumoral edema decreased the electric field magnitude within the tumor by an average of 26%. The effect of peritumoral edema on the electric field distribution was spatially heterogenous, being most significant at the tissue interface between edema and tumor. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of peritumoral edema during TTFields modelling may have a dramatic effect on the predicted electric field magnitude within the tumor. Given the importance of electric field magnitude for the anti-tumoral effects of TTFields, the presence of edema should be considered both in future modelling studies and when planning TTField therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".