MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379988093 · doi:10.1016/j.adro.2023.101281

Plan Assessment Metrics for Dose Painting in Stereotactic Radiosurgery

2023· article· en· W4379988093 on OpenAlexafffund
Benjamin Z. Tham, Dionne M. Aleman, Håkan Nordström, Nelly Nygren, Catherine Coolens

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Radiation Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchElekta
KeywordsMedicineRadiosurgeryMedical physicsPlan (archaeology)Nuclear medicineRadiologyRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: As radiation therapy treatment precision increases with advancements in imaging and radiation delivery, dose painting treatment becomes increasingly feasible, where targets receive a nonuniform radiation dose. The high precision of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) makes it a good candidate for dose painting treatments, but no suitable metrics to assess dose painting SRS plans exist. Existing dose painting assessment metrics weigh target overdose and underdose equally but are unsuited for SRS plans, which typically avoid target underdose more. Current SRS metrics also prioritize reducing healthy tissue dose through selectivity and dose fall-off, and these metrics assume single prescriptions. We propose a set of metrics for dose painting SRS that would meet clinical needs and are calculated with nonuniform dose painting prescriptions. Methods and Materials: Sample dose painting SRS prescriptions are first created from Gamma Knife SRS cases, apparent diffusion coefficient magnetic resonance images, and various image-to-prescription functions. Treatment plans are found through semi-infinite linear programming optimization and using clinically determined isocenters, then assessed with existing and proposed metrics. Modified versions of SRS metrics are proposed, including coverage, selectivity, conformity, efficiency, and gradient indices. Quality factor, a current dose painting metric, is applied both without changes and with modifications. A new metric, integral dose ratio, is proposed as a measure of target overdose. Results: The merits of existing and modified metrics are demonstrated and discussed. A modified conformity index using mean or minimum prescription dose would be suitable for dose painting SRS with integral or maximum boost methods, respectively. Either modified efficiency index is a suitable replacement for the existing gradient index. Conclusions: The proposed modified SRS metrics are appropriate measures of plan quality for dose painting SRS plans and have the advantage of giving equal values as the original SRS metrics when applied to single-prescription plans.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.396
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Radiation OncologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207