Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37342210›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2023

A deep-learning-based dose verification tool utilizing fluence maps for a cobalt-60 compensator-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy system.

Kyuhak Oh, Mary P Gronberg, Tucker J Netherton, Bishwambhar Sengupta, Carlos E Cardenas, Laurence E Court, Eric C Ford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kyuhak OhDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
Mary P GronbergDepartment of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Tucker J NethertonDepartment of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Bishwambhar SenguptaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
Carlos E CardenasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA.
Laurence E CourtDepartment of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Eric C FordDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: A novel cobalt-60 compensator-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) system was developed for a resource-limited environment but lacked an efficient dose verification algorithm. The aim of this study was to develop a deep-learning-based dose verification algorithm for accurate and rapid dose predictions. Materials and methods: A deep-learning network was employed to predict the doses from static fields related to beam commissioning. Inputs were a cube-shaped phantom, a beam binary mask, and an intersecting volume of the phantom and beam binary mask, while output was a 3-dimensional (3D) dose. The same network was extended to predict patient-specific doses for head and neck cancers using two different approaches. A field-based method predicted doses for each field and combined all calculated doses into a plan, while the plan-based method combined all nine fluences into a plan to predict doses. Inputs included patient computed tomography (CT) scans, binary beam masks, and fluence maps truncated to the patient's CT in 3D. Results: For static fields, predictions agreed well with ground truths with average deviations of less than 0.5% for percent depth doses and profiles. Even though the field-based method showed excellent prediction performance for each field, the plan-based method showed better agreement between clinical and predicted dose distributions. The distributed dose deviations for all planned target volumes and organs at risk were within 1.3 Gy. The calculation speed for each case was within two seconds. Conclusions: A deep-learning-based dose verification tool can accurately and rapidly predict doses for a novel cobalt-60 compensator-based IMRT system.

Indexed as

Cobalt-60 compensator-based IMRTDeep-learningDose predictionFluence map

Identifiers

PMID37342210
PMCPMC10277917

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.