MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384661729 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ace876

Validation of an MR-based multimodal method for molecular composition and proton stopping power ratio determination using <i>ex vivo</i> animal tissues and tissue-mimicking phantoms

2023· article· en· W4384661729 on OpenAlexaff
Raanan Marants, Sebastian Tattenberg, Jessica Scholey, Evangelia Kaza, Xin Miao, Thomas Benkert, Olivia Magneson, Jade Fischer, Luciano Vinas, Katharina Niepel, Thomas Bortfeld, Guillaume Landry, Katia Parodi, Joost Verburg, Atchar Sudhyadhom

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Cancer InstituteMassachusetts General Hospital
KeywordsImaging phantomMaterials scienceStopping powerBiomedical engineeringMagnetic resonance imagingVoxelNuclear medicineSoft tissueNuclear magnetic resonanceMedicineRadiologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective . Range uncertainty in proton therapy is an important factor limiting clinical effectiveness. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can measure voxel-wise molecular composition and, when combined with kilovoltage CT (kVCT), accurately determine mean ionization potential ( I m ), electron density, and stopping power ratio (SPR). We aimed to develop a novel MR-based multimodal method to accurately determine SPR and molecular compositions. This method was evaluated in tissue-mimicking and ex vivo porcine phantoms, and in a brain radiotherapy patient. Approach . Four tissue-mimicking phantoms with known compositions, two porcine tissue phantoms, and a brain cancer patient were imaged with kVCT and MRI. Three imaging-based values were determined: SPR CM (CT-based Multimodal), SPR MM (MR-based Multimodal), and SPR stoich (stoichiometric calibration). MRI was used to determine two tissue-specific quantities of the Bethe Bloch equation ( I m , electron density) to compute SPR CM and SPR MM . Imaging-based SPRs were compared to measurements for phantoms in a proton beam using a multilayer ionization chamber (SPR MLIC ). Main results . Root mean square errors relative to SPR MLIC were 0.0104(0.86%), 0.0046(0.45%), and 0.0142(1.31%) for SPR CM , SPR MM , and SPR stoich , respectively. The largest errors were in bony phantoms, while soft tissue and porcine tissue phantoms had <1% errors across all SPR values. Relative to known physical molecular compositions, imaging-determined compositions differed by approximately ≤10%. In the brain case, the largest differences between SPR stoich and SPR MM were in bone and high lipids/fat tissue. The magnitudes and trends of these differences matched phantom results. Significance . Our MR-based multimodal method determined molecular compositions and SPR in various tissue-mimicking phantoms with high accuracy, as confirmed with proton beam measurements. This method also revealed significant SPR differences compared to stoichiometric kVCT-only calculation in a clinical case, with the largest differences in bone. These findings support that including MRI in proton therapy treatment planning can improve the accuracy of calculated SPR values and reduce range uncertainties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207