MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036078754 · doi:10.1115/1.4047551

Treatment Planning Optimization in Irreversible Electroporation for Complete Ablation of Variously Sized Cervical Tumors: A Numerical Study

2020· article· en· W3036078754 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIrreversible electroporationProtocol (science)AblationElectroporationSortingMedicineComputer scienceTumor ablationAlgorithmPathologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Irreversible electroporation (IRE), a relatively new energy-based tumor ablation technology, has shown itself in the last decade to be able to safely ablate tumors with favorable clinical outcomes, yet little work has been done on optimizing the IRE protocol to variously sized tumors. Incomplete tumor ablation has been shown to be the main reason leading to the local recurrence and thus treatment failure. The goal of this study was to develop a general optimization approach to optimize the IRE protocol for cervical tumors in different sizes, while minimizing the damage to normal tissues. This kind of approach can lay a foundation for future personalized treatment of IRE. First, a statistical IRE cervical tumor death model was built using previous data in our group. Then, a multi-objective optimization problem model was built, in which the decision variables are five IRE-setting parameters, namely, the pulse strength (U), the length of active tip (H), the number of pulses delivered in one round between a pair of electrodes (A), the distance between electrodes (D), and the number of electrodes (N). The domains of the decision variables were determined based on the clinical experience. Finally, the problem model was solved by using nondominated sorting genetic algorithms II (NSGA-II) algorithm to give respective optimal protocol for three sizes of cervical tumors. Every protocol was assessed by the evaluation criterion established in the study to show the efficacy in a more straightforward way. The results of the study demonstrate this approach can theoretically provide the optimal IRE protocol for different sizes of tumors and may be generalizable to other types, sizes, and locations of tumors.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.263 · 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