MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220864210 · doi:10.1186/s41205-022-00136-w

Optical scan and 3D printing guided radiation therapy – an application and provincial experience in cutaneous nasal carcinoma

2022· article· en· W4220864210 on OpenAlex
Jui Chih Cheng, Arbind Dubey, James F. Beck, David Sasaki, Ahmet Leylek, Shrinivas Rathod

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue3D Printing in Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImaging phantomBasal cell carcinomaForeheadNuclear medicineNoseSkin cancerBasal cellRadiologySurgeryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Single field Orthovoltage radiation is an acceptable modality used for the treatment of nasal cutaneous cancer. However, this technique has dosimetric pitfalls and unnecessary excessive exposure of radiation to organs at risk (OAR). We present the clinical outcome of a case series of cutaneous nasal tumours using a novel technique incorporating an optical scanner and a 3-dimensional (3D) printer to deliver treatments using parallel opposed (POP) fields. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The POP delivery method was validated using ion chamber and phantom measurements before implementation. A retrospective chart review of 26 patients treated with this technique between 2015 and 2019 was conducted. Patients' demographics and treatment outcomes were gathered and tabulated. These patients first underwent an optical scan of their faces to collect topographical data. The data were then transcribed into 3D printing algorithms, and positive impressions of the faces were printed. Custom nose block bolus was made with wax encased in an acrylic shell; 4 cm thick using the printed face models. Custom lead shielding was also generated. Treatments were delivered using 250 KeV photons POP arrangement with 4 cm diameter circle applicator cone and prescribed to the midplane. Dose and fractionation were as per physician discretion. RESULTS: Phantom measurements at mid-plane were found to match the prescribed dose within ±0.5%. For the 26 cases in this review, the median age was 78.5 years, with 15 females and 11 males. 85% of cases had Basal cell carcinoma (BCC); 1 had squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), one had synchronous BCC + SCC, and 1 had Merkel cell carcinoma. Twenty-one cases had T1N0 disease, 4 had T2N0, and 1 had T3N0. Dose and fractionation delivered were 40Gy in 10 fractions for the majority of cases. The complete response rate at a median follow-up of 6 months was 88%; 1 patient had a refractory tumour, and one patient had a recurrence. Toxicities were minor with 81% with no reported side effects. Three patients experienced grade 3 skin toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of optic scanner and 3D printing technology, with the innovative approach of using POP orthovoltage beams, allows an effective and efficient way of treatment carcinomas of the nose with a high control rate and low toxicity profiles.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.298 · 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