MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402737034 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad7e76

Phase-change ultrasound contrast agents for proton range verification: towards an in vivo application

2024· article· en· W4402737034 on OpenAlexaff
Bram Carlier, Sophie V. Heymans, Gonzalo Collado‐Lara, Luigi Musetta, Marcus Ingram, Yosra Toumia, Gaio Paradossi, Hendrik J. Vos, Tania Roskams, Jan D’hooge, Koen Van Den Abeele, Edmond Sterpin, Uwe Himmelreich

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectron Spin Resonance Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersH2020 Excellent ScienceUniversité Catholique de LouvainEuropean CommissionVlaamse regeringFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekKU Leuven
KeywordsContrast (vision)In vivoUltrasoundRange (aeronautics)Phase contrast microscopyPhase (matter)ProtonMaterials scienceNuclear magnetic resonanceBiomedical engineeringMedical physicsPhysicsMedicineOpticsAcousticsNuclear physicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. In proton therapy, range uncertainties prevent optimal benefit from the superior depth-dose characteristics of proton beams over conventional photon-based radiotherapy. To reduce these uncertainties we recently proposed the use of phase-change ultrasound contrast agents as an affordable and effective range verification tool. In particular, superheated nanodroplets can convert into echogenic microbubbles upon proton irradiation, whereby the resulting ultrasound contrast relates to the proton range with high reproducibility. Here, we provide a first in vivo proof-of-concept of this technology. Approach. First, the in vitro biocompatibility of radiation-sensitive poly(vinyl alcohol) perfluorobutane nanodroplets was investigated using several colorimetric assays. Then, in vivo ultrasound contrast was characterized using acoustic droplet vaporization (ADV) and later using proton beam irradiations at varying energies (49.7 MeV and 62 MeV) in healthy Sprague Dawley rats. A preliminary evaluation of the in vivo biocompatibility was performed using ADV and a combination of physiology monitoring and histology. Main results. Nanodroplets were non-toxic over a wide concentration range (<1 mM). In healthy rats, intravenously injected nanodroplets primarily accumulated in the organs of the reticuloendothelial system, where the lifetime of the generated ultrasound contrast (<30 min) was compatible with a typical radiotherapy fraction (<5 min). Spontaneous droplet vaporization did not result in significant background signals. Online ultrasound imaging of the liver of droplet-injected rats demonstrated an energy-dependent proton response, which can be tuned by varying the nanodroplet concentration. However, caution is warranted when deciding on the exact nanodroplet dose regimen as a mild physiological response (drop in cardiac rate, granuloma formation) was observed after ADV. Significance. These findings underline the potential of phase-change ultrasound contrast agents for in vivo proton range verification and provide the next step towards eventual clinical applications.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.433
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicElectron Spin Resonance StudiesFrench-language works237,207