Transformational Role of Medical Imaging in (Radiation) Oncology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Onboard, real-time, imaging techniques, from the original megavoltage planar imaging devices, to the emerging combined MRI-Linear Accelerators, have brought a huge transformation in the ability to deliver targeted radiation therapies. Each generation of these technologies enables lethal doses of radiation to be delivered to target volumes with progressively more accuracy and thus allows shrinking of necessary geometric margins, leading to reduced toxicities. Alongside these improvements in treatment delivery, advances in medical imaging, e.g., PET, and MRI, have also allowed target volumes themselves to be better defined. The development of functional and molecular imaging is now driving a conceptually larger step transformation to both better understand the cancer target and disease to be treated, as well as how tumors respond to treatment. A biological description of the tumor microenvironment is now accepted as an essential component of how to personalize and adapt treatment. This applies not only to radiation oncology but extends widely in cancer management from surgical oncology planning and interventional radiology, to evaluation of targeted drug delivery efficacy in medical oncology/immunotherapy. Here, we will discuss the role and requirements of functional and metabolic imaging techniques in the context of brain tumors and metastases to reliably provide multi-parametric imaging biomarkers of the tumor microenvironment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".