MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191334052 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ac1d1e

Patient-specific microdosimetry: a proof of concept

2021· article· en· W3191334052 on OpenAlexafffund
Joseph M. DeCunha, Fernanda Villegas, Martin Vallières, José Torres, Sophie Camilleri‐Broët, Shirin A. Enger

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIonizing radiationNucleusRelative biological effectivenessRADIUSNuclear medicineSpecific energyRadiationLinear energy transferIrradiationPhysicsNuclear physicsComputer scienceBiologyMedicineThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Microscopic energy deposition distributions from ionizing radiation vary depending on biological target size and are used to predict the biological effects of an irradiation. Ionizing radiation is thought to kill cells or inhibit the cell cycle mainly by damaging DNA in the cell nucleus. The size of cells and nuclei depends on tissue type, cell cycle, and malignancy, all of which vary between patients. The aim of this study was to develop methods to perform patient-specific microdosimetry, that being, determining microdosimetric quantities in volumes that correspond to the sizes of cells and nuclei observed in a patient’s tissue. A histopathological sample extracted from a stage I lung adenocarcinoma patient was analyzed. A pouring simulation was used to generate a three-dimensional tissue model from cell and nucleus size information determined from the histopathological sample. Microdosimetric distributions including <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi>f</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>y</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>y</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> were determined for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>60</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">o</mml:mi> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mspace width=".25em"/> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>192</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mspace width=".25em"/> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Y</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>169</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi> </mml:math> and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>125</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> </mml:math> in a patient-specific model containing a distribution of cell and nucleus sizes. Fixed radius models and a summation method were compared to the full patient-specific model to evaluate their suitability for fast determination of patient-specific microdosimetric parameters. In the summation method, f(y) from many fixed radii models are summed. Fixed radius models do not provide a close approximation of the full patient-specific model <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mover accent="true"> <mml:mi>y</mml:mi> <mml:mo>¯</mml:mo> </mml:mover> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> or <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mover accent="true"> <mml:mi>y</mml:mi> <mml:mo>¯</mml:mo> </mml:mover> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mspace width=".25em"/> </mml:math> for the lower energy sources investigated, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Y</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>169</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi> </mml:math> and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">I</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>125</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mo>.</mml:mo> </mml:math> The higher energy sources investigated, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi> <mml:none/> <mml:none/> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>60</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">o</mml:mi> </mml:math> and

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207