MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411148007 · doi:10.1016/j.ctro.2025.100992

Online CBCT-based adaptive radiation with reduced PTV margins for prostate cancer: Does reference plan comparison tell the whole story?

2025· article· en· W4411148007 on OpenAlexafffund
Margaret L. Dahn, R Lee MacDonald, Amanda Cherpak, Stefan Allen, Hannah Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Translational Radiation Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMedical Council of CanadaDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerMedical physicsOptometryCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Online adaptive radiation (ART) is a novel treatment approach that allows for a new daily treatment plan based on cone beam CT (CBCT) imaging. This daily adaptation facilitates precise tumor and organ-at-risk (OAR) localization and minimizes the impact of interfractional motion, allowing for planning target volume (PTV) margin reduction. Isotropic PTV margins for localized non-stereotactic adaptive prostate radiation performed on an ETHOS linear accelerator with HyperSight have been reduced from standard 7 mm to 5 mm. This study assesses the impact of margin reduction by evaluating the dose metrics of patient reference plans, as well as daily treated plans, for 7 mm vs 5 mm PTV margins. Methods: Patients with prostate cancer receiving moderately hypofractionated adaptive radiation were initially treated with a 7 mm PTV margin (n = 10). This retrospective study generated 5 mm PTV margin treatment plans (n = 10) for these patients for comparison. In addition, a full adaptive 20 fraction treatment course was simulated with margin reduction to identify differences not recognized with reference plan comparison alone. Results: Bladder V40.8 and V48.6 but not V60 were significantly reduced in 5 mm treatment plans compared to 7 mm treatment plans. However, when daily treated plan data was examined bladder V60 was lower for the 5 mm PTV case. Similarly, rectum doses V24.6-V57 but not V60 were significantly reduced in 5 mm PTV margin treatment plans. Further differences were identified when looking at the daily treated plan data as opposed to simply comparing reference plans. Significance: In the era of online ART, with significant data available, such as daily treated plan dosimetry, analysis of reference plans alone may not be sufficient. PTV margin reduction, made possible due to the use of online ART, reduced the volume of bladder and rectum receiving <60 Gy, which may reduce toxicity and secondary malignancy risk.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Translational Radiation OncologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207