MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377023870 · doi:10.3389/fradi.2023.1190763

A detailed dosimetric comparative study of IMRT and VMAT in normal brain tissues for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with radiotherapy

2023· article· en· W4377023870 on OpenAlex
Kainan Shao, Shuang Zheng, Yajuan Wang, Xue Bai, Hongying Luo, Fenglei Du

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Radiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNasopharyngeal carcinomaMedicineNuclear medicineRadiation therapyTemporal lobeStage (stratigraphy)Brain tissueRadiologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Radiotherapy (RT) is the primary treatment for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, it can cause implicit RT-induced injury by irradiating normal brain tissue. To date, there have been no detailed reports on the radiated exact location in the brain, the corresponding radiation dose, and their relationship. Methods: We analyzed 803 Chinese NPC patients treated with RT and used a CT brain template in a Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space to compare the group differences in RT dose distribution for different RT technologies (IMRT or VMAT). Results: Brain regions that received high doses (>50 Gy) of radiation were mainly located in parts of the temporal and limbic lobes, where radioactive damage often occurs. Brain regions that accepted higher doses with IMRT were mainly located near the anterior region of the nasopharyngeal tumor, while brain regions that accepted higher doses with VMAT were mainly located near the posterior region of the tumor. No significant difference was detected between IMRT and VMAT for T1 stage patients. For T2 stage patients, differences were widely distributed, with VMAT showing a significant dose advantage in protecting the normal brain tissue. For T3 stage patients, VMAT showed an advantage in the superior temporal gyrus and limbic lobe, while IMRT showed an advantage in the posterior cerebellum. For T4 stage patients, VMAT showed a disadvantage in protecting the normal brain tissue. These results indicate that IMRT and VMAT have their own advantages in sparing different organs at risk (OARs) in the brain for different T stages of NPC patients treated with RT. Conclusion: Our approach for analyzing dosimetric characteristics in a standard MNI space for Chinese NPC patients provides greater convenience in toxicity and dosimetry analysis with superior localization accuracy. Using this method, we found interesting differences from previous reports: VMAT showed a disadvantage in protecting the normal brain tissue for T4 stage NPC patients.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · 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