Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36988665›Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2023

Image-based features in machine learning to identify delivery errors and predict error magnitude for patient-specific IMRT quality assurance.

Ying Huang, Yifei Pi, Kui Ma, Xiaojuan Miao, Sichao Fu, Hua Chen, Hao Wang, Hengle Gu, Yan Shao, Yanhua Duan and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ying HuangShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Yifei PiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan, China.
Kui MaVarian Medical Systems No.8 Yun Cheng Street, Beijing, China.
Xiaojuan MiaoThe General Hospital of Western Theater Command PLA, Chengdu, China.
Sichao FuThe General Hospital of Western Theater Command PLA, Chengdu, China.
Hua ChenShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Hao WangShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Hengle GuShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Yan ShaoShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Yanhua DuanShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Aihui FengShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China.
Weihai ZhuoKey Lab of Nucl. Phys. & Ion-Beam Appl. (MOE), Fudan University, Shanghai, China. whzhuo@fudan.edu.cn.
Zhiyong XuShanghai Chest Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China. xzyong12vip@sina.com.
Shanghai Chest Hospital · CNShanghai Jiao Tong University · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University · CNFudan University · CN

Funding

Science and Technology Innovation Plan Of Shanghai Science and Technology Commission 22YF1442600
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo identify delivery error type and predict associated error magnitude by image-based features using machine learning (ML).

methodsIn this study, a total of 40 thoracic plans (including 208 beams) were selected, and four error types with different magnitudes were introduced into the original plans, including 1) collimator misalignment (COLL), 2) monitor unit (MU) variation, 3) systematic multileaf collimator misalignment (MLCS), and 4) random MLC misalignment (MLCR). These dose distributions of portal dose predictions for the original plans were defined as the reference dose distributions (RDD), while those for the error-introduced plans were defined as the error-introduced dose distributions (EDD). Both distributions were calculated for all beams with portal dose image prediction (PDIP). Besides, 14 image-based features were extracted from RDD and EDD of portal dose predictions to obtain the feature vectors. In addition, a random forest was adopted for the multiclass classification task, and regression prediction for error magnitude.

resultsThe top five features extracted with the highest weight included 1) the relative displacement in the x direction, 2) the ratio of the absolute minimum residual error to the maximal RDD value, 3) the product of the maximum and minimum residuals, 4) the ratio of the absolute maximum residual error to the maximal RDD value, and 5) the ratio of the absolute mean residual value to the maximal RDD value. The relative displacement in the x direction had the highest weight. The overall accuracy of the five-class classification model was 99.85% for the validation set and 99.30% for the testing set. This model could be applied to the classification of the error-free plan, COLL, MU, MLCS, and MLCR with an accuracy of 100%, 98.4%, 99.9%, 98.0%, and 98.3%, respectively. MLCR had the worst performance in error magnitude prediction (70.1-96.6%), while others had better performance in error magnitude prediction (higher than 93%). In the error magnitude prediction, the mean absolute error (MAE) between predicted error magnitude and actual error ranged from 0.03 to 0.33, with the root mean squared error (RMSE) varying from 0.17 to 0.56 for the validation set. The MAE and RMSE ranged from 0.03 to 0.50 and 0.44 to 0.59 for the test set, respectively.

conclusionIt could be demonstrated in this study that the image-based features extracted from RDD and EDD can be employed to identify different types of delivery errors and accurately predict error magnitude with the assistance of ML techniques. They can be used to associate traditional gamma analysis with clinically based analysis for error classification and magnitude prediction in patient-specific IMRT quality assurance.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedHumansMachine LearningRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedArtificial intelligenceDose distribuctionError predictionRandom forestThoracic cancer

Identifiers

PMID36988665
PMCPMC10133379
OpenAlexW4361297050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.