ArticleMedical physics2022
Towards subpercentage uncertainty proton stopping-power mapping via dual-energy CT: Direct experimental validation and uncertainty analysis of a statistical iterative image reconstruction method.
Article in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Derivation of tissue properties from basis-vector model weights for dual-energy CT-based Monte Carlo proton beam dose calculations.Biomedical physics & engineering express · 2025Article
- MB-DECTNet: a model-based unrolling network for accurate 3D dual-energy CT reconstruction from clinically acquired helical scans.Physics in medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Motion-compensated scheme for sequential scanned statistical iterative dual-energy CT reconstruction.Physics in medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Experimental validation of proton physics models of Geant4 for calculating stopping power ratio.Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection · 2022Article
- Dose Prediction in Proton Cancer Therapy based on Density Maps from Dual-energy CT Using Joint Statistical Image Reconstruction.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical EngineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the potential of a joint dual-energy computerized tomography (CT) reconstruction process (statistical image reconstruction method built on a basis vector model (JSIR-BVM)) implemented on a 16-slice commercial CT scanner to measure high spatial resolution stopping-power ratio (SPR) maps with uncertainties of less than 1%.
methodsJSIR-BVM was used to reconstruct images of effective electron density and mean excitation energy from dual-energy CT (DECT) sinograms for 10 high-purity samples of known density and atomic composition inserted into head and body phantoms. The measured DECT data consisted of 90 and 140 kVp axial sinograms serially acquired on a Philips Brilliance Big Bore CT scanner without beam-hardening corrections. The corresponding SPRs were subsequently measured directly via ion chamber measurements on a MEVION S250 superconducting synchrocyclotron and evaluated theoretically from the known sample compositions and densities. Deviations of JSIR-BVM SPR values from their theoretically calculated and directly measured ground-truth values were evaluated for our JSIR-BVM method and our implementation of the Hünemohr-Saito (H-S) DECT image-domain decomposition technique for SPR imaging. A thorough uncertainty analysis was then performed for five different scenarios (comparison of JSIR-BVM stopping-power ratio/stopping power (SPR/SP) to International Commission on Radiation Measurements and Units benchmarks; comparison of JSIR-BVM SPR to measured benchmarks; and uncertainties in JSIR-BVM SPR/SP maps for patients of unknown composition) per the Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology and the Guide to Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, including the impact of uncertainties in measured photon spectra, sample composition and density, photon cross section and I-value models, and random measurement uncertainty. Estimated SPR uncertainty for three main tissue groups in patients of unknown composition and the weighted proportion of each tissue type for three proton treatment sites were then used to derive a composite range uncertainty for our method.
resultsMean JSIR-BVM SPR estimates deviated by less than 1% from their theoretical and directly measured ground-truth values for most inserts and phantom geometries except for high-density Delrin and Teflon samples with SPR error relative to proton measurements of 1.1% and -1.0% (head phantom) and 1.1% and -1.1% (body phantom). The overall root-mean-square (RMS) deviations over all samples were 0.39% and 0.52% (head phantom) and 0.43% and 0.57% (body phantom) relative to theoretical and directly measured ground-truth SPRs, respectively. The corresponding RMS (maximum) errors for the image-domain decomposition method were 2.68% and 2.73% (4.68% and 4.99%) for the head phantom and 0.71% and 0.87% (1.37% and 1.66%) for the body phantom. Compared to H-S SPR maps, JSIR-BVM yielded 30% sharper and twofold sharper images for soft tissues and bone-like surrogates, respectively, while reducing noise by factors of 6 and 3, respectively. The uncertainty (coverage factor k = 1) of the DECT-to-benchmark values comparison ranged from 0.5% to 1.5% and is dominated by scanning-beam photon-spectra uncertainties. An analysis of the SPR uncertainty for patients of unknown composition showed a JSIR-BVM uncertainty of 0.65%, 1.21%, and 0.77% for soft-, lung-, and bony-tissue groups which led to a composite range uncertainty of 0.6-0.9%.
conclusionsObserved JSIR-BVM SPR estimation errors were all less than 50% of the estimated k = 1 total uncertainty of our benchmarking experiment, demonstrating that JSIR-BVM high spatial resolution, low-noise SPR mapping is feasible and is robust to variations in the geometry of the scanned object. In contrast, the much larger H-S SPR estimation errors are dominated by imaging noise and residual beam-hardening artifacts. While the uncertainties characteristic of our current JSIR-BVM implementation can be as large as 1.5%, achieving < 1% total uncertainty is feasible by improving the accuracy of scanner-specific scatter-profile and photon-spectrum estimates. With its robustness to beam-hardening artifact, image noise, and variations in phantom size and geometry, JSIR-BVM has the potential to achieve high spatial-resolution SPR mapping with subpercentage accuracy and estimated uncertainty in the clinical setting.
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.