MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413117286 · doi:10.1002/mp.18073

Seventy‐First Annual Scientific Meeting of Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists, RBC Place London, London, Ontario, June 5–7, 2025

2025· article· en· W4413117286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical physicistLibrary scienceMedical physicsMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiotherapy often experience significant anatomical changes that necessitate replanning.However, replanning is resource-intensive and decided on short notice.Therefore, we aim to predict the progression of anatomical changes throughout radiotherapy so that replanning can be anticipated in advance.Methods: We trained a variational autoencoder (VAE) to learn condensed latent vectors of CBCT scans using our in-house dataset of 420 HNC patients and 5323 CBCT scans.Subsequently, we developed a model to predict changes in these latent-space vectors over time based on the initial CBCT and clinical features (eg.staging, chemotherapy, etc.).Points along the predicted latent trajectory were decoded by the VAE to reconstruct synthetic future CBCT images.We evaluated the model by calculating the Dice score between actual and predicted body masks for each fraction.Additionally, we assessed the percent change of the area between the first and subsequent fractions in true versus predicted images, a useful replanning metric for determining shrinkage.Results: Initially, we trained our models on binary masks of single image slices, rather than the full CBCT.Our model achieved an average test set Dice score of 0.94 and area error of 5.9% for all fractions.The area error decreases as more CBCTs are incorporated throughout treatment.We are expanding our model to predict 3D anatomical changes and implementing a replanning flagging system based on the expected changes. Conclusion:In a DIBH treatment, 3D CRT techniques is dosimetrically advantageous and more forgiving to tolerance over VMAT.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3710.147

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy→French-language works237,207→