MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213228270 · doi:10.1016/j.phro.2022.02.001

Comparison of visibility of iodinated hydrogel and gadolinium-modified hyaluronic acid spacer gels on computed tomography and onboard imaging

2022· article· en· W4213228270 on OpenAlexafffund
Vlora Riberdy, E Ruiz, Nienke Hoekstra, Gerson M. Struik, Jean‐Philippe Pignol

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie UniversityDalhousie Medical Research FoundationBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research InstituteCancer Research Institute
KeywordsGadoliniumMaterials scienceMagnetic resonance imagingImaging phantomNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringCone beam computed tomographyHounsfield scaleHyaluronic acidIodinated contrastPolyethylene glycolComputed tomographyMedicineRadiologyChemistryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), accurate definition of the tumour bed is crucial to reduce the risk of local recurrence and the volume of healthy tissue irradiated. Recently, hydrogels have been proposed to improve visibility of the lumpectomy cavity for APBI. The aim of this study was to alter two commercially available hyaluronic acid (HA) gels, with gadopentenate dimeglumine (GD), a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agent. We hypothesize that after injection in the surgical cavity, the mixtures will be visible with computed tomography (CT) for improved treatment planning, cone-beam CT (CBCT) for improved patient setup and planar kilovoltage (kV) x-ray for real-time tracking during treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: study, GD was mixed with the two HA gels, and 1 mL of each mixture was injected into fatty and muscular tissue of a pork phantom. Visibility with CT, CBCT and planar x-ray imaging was assessed. Contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were measured and compared to commercially available iodinated polyethylene glycol (PEG). RESULTS: The gel mixtures showed increased visibility over HA gels without GD. When comparing CNR of the gel mixtures to that of iodinated PEG on CT, there was a 4-fold increase in muscle for both mixtures and a 1.6-fold to 3.6-fold increase in fat, depending on the HA gel. Gel mixtures showed better visibility with planar kV imaging over iodinated PEG. CONCLUSION: Addition of GD to HA gels increases visibility with CT, CBCT and planar x-ray imaging, indicating potential for improved delineation and positioning in APBI.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics and Imaging in Radiation OncologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207