MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416533008 · doi:10.1002/acm2.70370

Dosimetric evaluation of Ethos 2.0 high‐fidelity mode for single‐isocenter SRS

2025· article· en· W4416533008 on OpenAlexaff
Udbhav S Ram, Richard A. Popple, John B. Fiveash, Katherine A. Heinzman, Yogesh Kumar, Natalie Viscariello, Dennis N. Stanley, Carlos Cárdenas, Joel A. Pogue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthosPlan (archaeology)TemplateMode (computer interface)Quality (philosophy)Clinical PracticeControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the impact of the Ethos 2.0 high-fidelity (HF) mode on single-isocenter, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) planning workflows. By comparing different planning templates, we assess the effects of HF mode and control rings (R) on plan quality, aiming to optimize treatment for patients with brain metastases. METHODS: A cohort of 45 patients with brain metastases was divided into a tuning (n = 15) and a validation set (n = 30). Four planning templates were evaluated: HFonRon, HFonRoff, HFoffRon, and HFoffRoff. Plans were generated using the Ethos Intelligent Optimization Engine (IOE v02.00.10), and all patients were prescribed 30 Gy in 5 fractions using 2 mm PTV margins. Plan quality was evaluated using target coverage (PTV V100%), normal brain dose (Brain-PTV V30Gy), Paddick conformity index (CI), and Falloff index. Plan complexity was evaluated using total MU's on a per-plan basis across the four templates. RESULTS: The HFonRon template produced better quality plans, achieving significant improvements in normal tissue sparing (p < 0.0001), CI (p < 0.0001), and Falloff index (p < 0.0001) compared to other templates. All templates provided clinically acceptable target coverage. In the HFoffRoff configuration, 97.5 % of targets met the coverage criterion (V100% > 95%). The other setups achieved coverage in 99.2% (HFoffRon), 96.6% (HFonRoff), and 98.3% (HFonRon) of targets, respectively. Plan complexity decreased significantly (p < 0.0001) when enabling HF mode compared to both HF disabled templates CONCLUSIONS: His study shows that combining Ethos 2.0's high-fidelity mode with user-defined control rings yields superior single-isocenter SRS plans compared with planning strategies that omit one or both features. This approach improves dose conformity, reduces normal tissue exposure, and decreases plan complexity through semi-automated, template-based planning. These findings suggest that HF mode can be a valuable tool in clinical practice for optimizing SRS treatments for patients with brain metastases.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designOther design
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207