MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390228887 · doi:10.1002/mp.16912

Multiscale Monte Carlo simulations for dosimetry in x‐ray breast imaging: Part II ‐ Microscopic scales

2023· article· en· W4390228887 on OpenAlexafffund
Rodrigo Trevisan Massera, Alessandra Tomal, Rowan M. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversidade Estadual de CampinasConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorGovernment of Canada
KeywordsVoxelMonte Carlo methodMammographyImaging phantomBreast cancerPhysicsNuclear medicineDigital mammographyMedicineRadiologyStatisticsMathematicsCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Although the benefits of breast screening and early diagnosis are known for reducing breast cancer mortality rates, the effects and risks of low radiation doses to the cells in the breast are still ongoing topics of study. Purpose To study specific energy distributions () in cytoplasm and nuclei of cells corresponding to glandular tissue for different x‐ray breast imaging modalities. Methods A cubic lattice (500 μm length side) containing 4064 spherical cells was irradiated with photons loaded from phase space files with varying glandular voxel doses (). Specific energy distributions were scored for nucleus and cytoplasm compartments using the PENELOPE (v. 2018) + penEasy (v. 2020) Monte Carlo (MC) code. The phase space files, generated in part I of this work, were obtained from MC simulations in a voxelized anthropomorphic phantom corresponding to glandular voxels for different breast imaging modalities, including digital mammography (DM), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), contrast enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and breast CT (BCT). Results In general, the average specific energy in nuclei is higher than the respective glandular dose scored in the same region, by up to 10%. The specific energy distributions for nucleus and cytoplasm are directly related to the magnitude of the glandular dose in the voxel (), with little dependence on the spatial location. For similar values, for nuclei is different between DM/DBT and CEDM/BCT, indicating that distinct x‐ray spectra play significant roles in . In addition, this behavior is also present when the specific energy distribution () is considered taking into account the GDD in the breast. Conclusions Microdosimetry studies are complementary to the traditional macroscopic breast dosimetry based on the mean glandular dose (MGD). For the same MGD, the specific energy distribution in glandular tissue varies between breast imaging modalities, indicating that this effect could be considered for studying the risks of exposing the breast to ionizing radiation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207