Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37396612›Full record

ArticleArXiv2023

Beam mask and sliding window-facilitated deep learning-based accurate and efficient dose prediction for pencil beam scanning proton therapy.

Lian Zhang, Jason M Holmes, Zhengliang Liu, Sujay A Vora, Terence T Sio, Carlos E Vargas, Nathan Y Yu, Sameer R Keole, Steven E Schild, Martin Bues and 5 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Lian ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Jason M HolmesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Zhengliang LiuDepartment of Computer Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Sujay A VoraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Terence T SioDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Carlos E VargasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Nathan Y YuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Sameer R KeoleDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Steven E SchildDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Martin BuesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Sheng LiDepartment of Data Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA.
Tianming LiuDepartment of Computer Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Jiajian ShenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
William W WongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Wei LiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.

Funding

4D Robust Optimization in Intensity-Modulated Proton TherapyK25CA168984 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI LIU, WEI · 2012 to 2015
$450k
NCI NIH HHS K25 CA168984
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop a DL-based PBSPT dose prediction workflow with high accuracy and balanced complexity to support on-line adaptive proton therapy clinical decision and subsequent replanning.

methodsPBSPT plans of 103 prostate cancer patients and 83 lung cancer patients previously treated at our institution were included in the study, each with CTs, structure sets, and plan doses calculated by the in-house developed Monte-Carlo dose engine. For the ablation study, we designed three experiments corresponding to the following three methods: 1) Experiment 1, the conventional region of interest (ROI) method. 2) Experiment 2, the beam mask (generated by raytracing of proton beams) method to improve proton dose prediction. 3) Experiment 3, the sliding window method for the model to focus on local details to further improve proton dose prediction. A fully connected 3D-Unet was adopted as the backbone. Dose volume histogram (DVH) indices, 3D Gamma passing rates, and dice coefficients for the structures enclosed by the iso-dose lines between the predicted and the ground truth doses were used as the evaluation metrics. The calculation time for each proton dose prediction was recorded to evaluate the method's efficiency.

resultsCompared to the conventional ROI method, the beam mask method improved the agreement of DVH indices for both targets and OARs and the sliding window method further improved the agreement of the DVH indices. For the 3D Gamma passing rates in the target, OARs, and BODY (outside target and OARs), the beam mask method can improve the passing rates in these regions and the sliding window method further improved them. A similar trend was also observed for the dice coefficients. In fact, this trend was especially remarkable for relatively low prescription isodose lines. The dose predictions for all the testing cases were completed within 0.25s.

Identifiers

PMID37396612
PMCPMC10312803

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.