Evaluation of CBCT scatter correction using deep convolutional neural networks for head and neck adaptive proton therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive proton therapy (APT) is a promising approach for the treatment of head and neck cancers. One crucial element of APT is daily volumetric imaging of the patient in the treatment position. Such data can be acquired with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), although scatter artifacts make uncorrected CBCT images unsuitable for proton therapy dose calculation. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the performance of a U-shape deep convolutive neural network (U-Net) to perform projection-based scatter correction and enable fast and accurate dose calculation on CBCT images in the context of head and neck APT. CBCT projections are simulated for a cohort of 48 head and neck patients using a GPU accelerated Monte Carlo (MC) code . A U-Net is trained to reproduce MC projection-based scatter correction from raw projections. The accuracy of the scatter correction is experimentally evaluated using CT and CBCT images of an anthropomorphic head phantom. The potential of the method for head and neck APT is assessed by comparing proton therapy dose distributions calculated on scatter-free, uncorrected and scatter-corrected CBCT images. Finally, dose calculation accuracy is estimated in experimental patient images using a previously validated empirical scatter correction as reference. The mean and mean absolute HU differences between scatter-free and scatter-corrected images are -0.8 and 13.4 HU, compared to -28.6 and 69.6 HU for the uncorrected images. In the head phantom, the root-mean square difference of proton ranges calculated in the reference CT and corrected CBCT is 0.73 mm. The average 2%/2 mm gamma pass rate for proton therapy plans optimized in the scatter free images and re-calculated in the scatter-corrected ones is 98.89%. In experimental CBCT patient images, a 3%/3 mm passing rate of 98.72% is achieved between the proposed method and the reference one. All CBCT projection volume could be corrected in less than 5 seconds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".