Endobronchially Implanted Real-Time Electromagnetic Transponder Beacon–Guided, Respiratory-Gated SABR for Moving Lung Tumors: A Prospective Phase 1/2 Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Endobronchial electromagnetic transponder beacons (EMT) provide real-time, precise positional data of moving lung tumors. We report results of a phase 1/2, prospective, single-arm cohort study evaluating the treatment planning effects of EMT-guided SABR for moving lung tumors. Methods and Materials: Eligible patients were adults, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0 to 2, with T1-T2N0 non-small cell lung cancer or pulmonary metastasis ≤4 cm with motion amplitude ≥5 mm. Three EMTs were endobronchially implanted using navigational bronchoscopy. Four-dimensional free-breathing computed tomography simulation scans were obtained, and end-exhalation phases were used to define the gating window internal target volume. A 3-mm expansion of gating window internal target volume defined the planning target volume (PTV). EMT-guided, respiratory-gated (RG) SABR was delivered (54 Gy/3 fractions or 48 Gy/4 fractions) using volumetric modulated arc therapy. For each RG-SABR plan, a 10-phase image-guided SABR plan was generated for dosimetric comparison. PTV/organ-at-risk (OAR) metrics were tabulated and analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank pair test. Treatment outcomes were evaluated using RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours; version 1.1). Results: < .005). Conclusions: EMT-guided RG-SABR significantly reduced PTVs of moving lung tumors compared with image-guided SABR. EMT-guided RG-SABR should be considered for tumors with large respiratory motion amplitudes or those located in close proximity to OARs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".