An updated approach for deriving PTV margins using image guidance and deformable dose accumulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective. To demonstrate an updated approach for deriving planning target volume (PTV) margins for a patient population treated with volumetric image-guided radiotherapy. Approach. The approach uses a semi-automated workflow within commercial radiotherapy applications that combines dose accumulation with the bidirectional local distance (BLD) metric. The patient cohort is divided into derivation and validation datasets. For each patient in the derivation dataset, a treatment plan is generated with a 0 mm PTV margin (the idealized treatment scenario without the influence of the standard margin). Deformable image registration enabled dose accumulation of these zero-margin plans. PTV margins are derived by using the BLD to calculate the geometric extent of underdosed regions of the clinical target volume (CTV). The PTV margin is validated by ensuring the specified CTV coverage criterion is met when the margin is applied to the validation dataset. Main results. The methodology was applied to two cohorts: 40 oropharyngeal cancer patients and 50 early-stage breast cancer patients. Ten patients from each cohort were used for validation. PTV margins derived for the oropharyngeal and early-stage breast cancer patient cohorts were 3 and 5 mm, respectively, and ensure that 95% of the prescription dose is delivered to 98% of the CTV for 90% of patients. Dose accumulation showed that the CTV coverage criterion was achieved for at least 90% of patients when the margins were applied. Significance. This methodology can be used to derive appropriate PTV margins for realistic treatment scenarios and any disease site, which will improve our understanding of patient outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".