ArticleThe British journal of radiology2022
Performance comparison of quantitative metrics for analysis of in vivo Cherenkov imaging incident detection during radiotherapy.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 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.
- Cherenkov Imaged Bio-Morphological Features Verify Patient Positioning With Deformable Tissue Translocation in Breast Radiation Therapy.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Innovative approaches in precision radiation oncology: advanced imaging technologies and challenges which shape the future of radiation therapy.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Imaging and characterization of optical emission fromPhysics in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Non-contact scintillator imaging dosimetry for total body irradiation in radiotherapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Color-resolved Cherenkov imaging allows for differential signal detection in blood and melanin content.Journal of biomedical optics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesExamine the responses of multiple image similarity metrics to detect patient positioning errors in radiotherapy observed through Cherenkov imaging, which may be used to optimize automated incident detection.
methodsAn anthropomorphic phantom mimicking patient vasculature, a biological marker seen in Cherenkov images, was simulated for a breast radiotherapy treatment. The phantom was systematically shifted in each translational direction, and Cherenkov images were captured during treatment delivery at each step. The responses of mutual information (MI) and the γ passing rate (%GP) were compared to that of existing field-shape matching image metrics, the Dice coefficient, and mean distance to conformity (MDC). Patient images containing other incidents were analyzed to verify the best detection algorithm for different incident types.
resultsPositional shifts in all directions were registered by both MI and %GP, degrading monotonically as the shifts increased. Shifts in intensity, which may result from erythema or bolus-tissue air gaps, were detected most by %GP. However, neither metric detected beam-shape misalignment, such as that caused by dose to unintended areas, as well as currently employed metrics (Dice and MDC).
conclusionsThis study indicates that different radiotherapy incidents may be detected by comparing both inter- and intrafractional Cherenkov images with a corresponding image similarity metric, varying with the type of incident. Future work will involve determining appropriate thresholds per metric for automatic flagging. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Classifying different algorithms for the detection of various radiotherapy incidents allows for the development of an automatic flagging system, eliminating the burden of manual review of Cherenkov images.
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.