Technical illustration of Volumetric arc conformal radiotherapy planning in a case of paratesticular sarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Paratesticular sarcoma are extremely rare malignant tumours. Unlike other sites, they tend to be lower grade and have higher propensity of lymphatic spread. They tend to fail locally and occasionally in the regional lymph nodes. In the absence of target volume delineation guidelines and technical illustration of conformal planning, we have made an attempt to illustrate conformal planning methodology and define target volume based on current evidence in a case of paratesticular sarcoma. Methods: We are presenting a case of 62-year-old male who presented with 15-cm scrotal swelling and underwent high inguinal orchidectomy with ligation of spermatic cord. Histopathology presented a well-differentiated leiomyosarcoma of epididymis. Post-operative radiotherapy target volume included the tumour bed, ipsilateral inguinal nodes and lower pelvic nodes as the clinical target volume. Conclusion: Adjuvant radiotherapy using advanced delivery technique such as volumetric arc technique can provide good dose distribution with good sparing of organs at risk. The downside of conformal radiation delivery is that it is a resource-intensive and has no established target volume delineation guidelines.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".