Repeatability and reproducibility of prostate apparent diffusion coefficient values on a 1.5 T magnetic resonance linear accelerator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and PurposeIntegrated magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-Linac) systems offer potential for biologically based adaptive radiation therapy using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). Accurate tracking of longitudinal ADC changes is key to establishing ADC-driven dose adaptation. Here, we report repeatability and reproducibility of intraprostatic ADC using deformable image registration (DIR) to correct for inter-fraction prostate changes.Materials and MethodsThe study included within-fraction repeat ADC measurements for three consecutive fractions for 20 patients with prostate cancer treated on a 1.5 T MR-Linac. We deformably registered successive fraction T2-weighted images and applied the deformation vector field to corresponding ADC maps to align to fraction 2. We delineated gross tumour volume (GTV), peripheral zone (PZ) and prostate clinical target volume (CTV) regions-of-interest (ROIs) on T2-weighted MRI and copied to ADC maps. We computed intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and percent repeatability coefficient (%RC) to determine within-fraction repeatability and between-fraction reproducibility for individual voxels, mean and 10th percentile ADC values per ROI.ResultsThe ICC between repeats and fractions was excellent for mean and 10th percentile ADC in all ROIs (ICC > 0.86), and moderate repeatability and reproducibility existed for individual voxels (ICC > 0.542). Similarly, low %RC within-fraction (4.2–17.9 %) mean and 10th percentile ADC existed, with greater %RC between fractions (10.2–36.8 %). Higher %RC existed for individual voxel within-fraction (21.7–30.6 %) and between-fraction (32.1–34.5 %) ADC.ConclusionsResults suggest excellent ADC repeatability and reproducibility in clinically relevant ROIs using DIR to correct between-fraction anatomical changes. We established the precision of voxel-level ADC tracking for future biologically based adaptation implementation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".