Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background And Purpose: Interfraction motion during cervical cancer radiotherapy is substantial in some patients, minimal in others. Non-adaptive plans may miss the target and/or unnecessarily irradiate normal tissue. Adaptive radiotherapy leads to superior dose-volume metrics but is resource-intensive. The aim of this study was to predict target motion, enabling patient selection and efficient resource allocation.
Materials And Methods: Forty cervical cancer patients had CT with full-bladder (CT-FB) and empty-bladder (CT-EB) at planning, and daily cone-beam CTs (CBCTs). The low-risk clinical target volume (CTV) was contoured. Mean coverage of the daily CTV by the CT-FB CTV was calculated for each patient. Eighty-three investigated variables included measures of organ geometry, patient, tumour and treatment characteristics. Models were trained on 29 patients (171 fractions). The Two-CT multivariate model could use all available data. The Single-CT multivariate model excluded data from the CT-EB. A univariate model was trained using the distance moved by the uterine fundus tip between CTs, the only method of patient selection found in published cervix plan-of-the-day studies. Models were tested on 11 patients (68 fractions). Accuracy in predicting mean coverage was reported as mean absolute error (MAE), mean squared error (MSE) and R.
Results: The Two-CT model was based upon rectal volume, dice similarity coefficient between CT-FB and CT-EB CTV, and uterine thickness. The Single-CT model was based upon rectal volume, uterine thickness and tumour size. Both performed better than the univariate model in predicting mean coverage (MAE 7 %, 7 % and 8 %; MSE 82 %, 65 %, 110 %; R 0.2, 0.4, -0.1).
Conclusion: Uterocervix motion is complex and multifactorial. We present two multivariate models which predicted motion with reasonable accuracy using pre-treatment information, and outperformed the only published method.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10901141 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2024.100554 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!