MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3210716961 · doi:10.1002/mp.15331

Technical note: Personalized treatment gating thresholds in frameless stereotactic radiosurgery using predictions of dosimetric fidelity and treatment interruption

2021· article· en· W3210716961 on OpenAlexaff
R. Lee MacDonald, Young Lee, Jannie Schasfoort, Hany Soliman, Arjun Sahgal, Mark Ruschin

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiosurgeryGatingDosimetryNuclear medicineFiducial markerMedicineComputer scienceRadiation therapyArtificial intelligenceRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Gamma Knife Icon (GKI) enables a user-defined gating threshold for intrafraction motion during stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). An optimal threshold would ensure dosimetric fidelity of the planned distribution and minimize treatment time extension by gating. A prediction of motion characteristics for a patient based on a retrospective database of motion traces could be beneficial to evaluating the choice of gating threshold. A short acquisition of motion may help to define a personalized threshold that balances dosimetric accuracy and treatment length. This study aims to evaluate the performance of a prediction of motion and the resultant dosimetric consequences for a range of motion gating thresholds. METHODS: A database of 2552 motion traces (776 patients) was analyzed using previously published methods to characterize patient intrafraction motion on the GKI. For a selection of six fractionated SRS patient cases (two patients with single brain metastasis, four vestibular schwannomas), a 10-min sample of motion was used to classify motion and identify traces in the database with similar metrics. The similar motion traces were used to perform a predictive reconstruction of the selected patient's delivered dose for a range of motion thresholds. The remaining fractions were reconstructed and compared to that predicted. From the six cases, 26 fractions were used to predict the number of interruptions (n = 26), change in target coverage (n = 26), and change in brainstem maximum dose (vestibular cases only, n = 20). The difference between mean predicted and reconstructed values was compared for accuracy. RESULTS: The difference between mean prediction and reconstructed values was 0.32 ± 0.38% in target coverage, 2.36 ± 5.06 interruptions, and 0.15 ± 0.24 Gy for the brainstem maximum dose. Sixty-seven of the 72 predictions (26 coverage, 26 interruptions, and 20 brainstem maximum dose) were within one standard deviation of the predicted mean. CONCLUSIONS: Large databases of motion traces were used to characterize patient performance and predict motion performance. Dosimetric deterioration due to motion and extension of treatment duration can be predicted in some cases using only a short acquisition of motion and the treatment plan. This reconstruction may provide benefit in generating a patient-specific motion threshold.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→