Artificial neural network-assisted prediction of radiobiological indices in head and neck cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and purpose: We proposed an artificial neural network model to predict radiobiological parameters for the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with radiation therapy. The model uses the tumor specification, demographics, and radiation dose distribution to predict the tumor control probability and the normal tissue complications probability. These indices are crucial for the assessment and clinical management of cancer patients during treatment planning. Methods: Two publicly available datasets of 31 and 215 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with conformal radiation therapy were selected. The demographics, tumor specifications, and radiation therapy treatment parameters were extracted from the datasets used as inputs for the training of perceptron. Radiobiological indices are calculated by open-source software using dosevolume histograms from radiation therapy treatment plans. Those indices were used as output in the training of a single-layer neural network. The distribution of data used for training, validation, and testing purposes was 70, 15, and 15%, respectively. Results: The best performance of the neural network was noted at epoch number 32 with the mean squared error of 0.0465. The accuracy of the prediction of radiobiological indices by the artificial neural network in training, validation, and test phases were determined to be 0.89, 0.87, and 0.82, respectively. We also found that the percentage volume of parotid inside the planning target volume is the significant parameter for the prediction of normal tissue complications probability. Conclusion: We believe that the model has significant potential to predict radiobiological indices and help clinicians in treatment plan evaluation and treatment management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".