ArticleMedical physics2021
A method for predictive modeling of tumor regression for lung adaptive radiotherapy.
Article in Medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automatic adaptive radiotherapy triggering based on CBCT using deep learning for esophageal cancer underwent volumetric modulated arc therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Estimation of adaptive radiation therapy requirements for rectal cancer: a two-center study.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Triggering daily online adaptive radiotherapy in the pelvis: Dosimetric effects and procedural implications of trigger parameter-value selection.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Seq2Morph: A deep learning deformable image registration algorithm for longitudinal imaging studies and adaptive radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Article
- Machine-learning-based prediction of the effectiveness of the delivered dose by exhale-gated radiotherapy for locally advanced lung cancer: The additional value of geometric over dosimetric parameters alone.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this work is to create a decision support methodology to predict when patients undergoing radiotherapy treatment for locally advanced lung cancer would potentially benefit from adaptive radiotherapy. The proposed methodology seeks to eliminate the manual subjective review by developing an automated statistical learning model to predict when tumor regression would trigger implementation of adaptive radiotherapy based on quantified anatomic changes observed in individual patients on-treatment cone beam computed tomographies (CTs). This proposed process seeks to improve the efficacy and efficiency of both the existing manual and automated adaptive review processes for locally advanced stage III lung cancer.
methodsA predictive algorithm was developed as a decision support tool to determine the potential utility of mid-treatment adaptive radiotherapy based on anatomic changes observed on 1158 daily CBCT images across 43 patients. The anatomic changes on each axial slice within specified regions-of-interest were quantified into a single value utilizing imaging similarity criteria comparing the daily CBCT to the initial simulation CT. The range of the quantified metrics for each fraction across all axial slices are reduced to specified quantiles, which are used as the predictive input to train a logistic regression algorithm. A "ground-truth" of the need for adaptive radiotherapy based on tumor regression was evaluated systematically on each of the daily CBCTs and used as the classifier in the logistic regression algorithm. Accuracy of the predictive model was assessed utilizing both a tenfold cross validation and an independent validation dataset, with the sensitivity, specificity, and fractional accuracy compared to the ground-truth.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity for the individual daily fractions ranged from 87.9%-94.3% and 91.9%-98.6% for a probability threshold of 0.2-0.5, respectively. The corresponding average treatment fraction difference between the model predictions and assessed ART "ground-truth" ranged from -2.25 to -0.07 fractions, with the model predictions consistently predicting the potential need for ART earlier in the treatment course. By initially utilizing a lower probability threshold, the higher sensitivity minimizes the chance of false negative by alerting the clinician to review a higher number of questionable cases.
conclusionsThe proposed methodology accurately predicted the first fraction at which individual patients may benefit from ART based on quantified anatomic changes observed in the on-treatment volumetric imaging. The generalizability of the proposed method has potential to expand to additional modes of adaptive radiotherapy for lung cancer patients with observed underlying anatomic changes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.