ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2023
Online prediction for respiratory movement compensation: a patient-specific gating control for MRI-guided radiotherapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective Respiratory Motion Correction Using Machine Learning and Pilot Tone (PROMPT) in Cardiac MRI.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Modeling of artificial intelligence-based respiratory motion prediction in MRI-guided radiotherapy: a review.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Review
- Applications of artificial intelligence for machine- and patient-specific quality assurance in radiation therapy: current status and future directions.Journal of radiation research · 2024Review
- Explicitly encoding the cyclic nature of breathing signal allows for accurate breathing motion prediction in radiotherapy with minimal training data.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Current Research Status of Respiratory Motion for Thorax and Abdominal Treatment: A Systematic Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to validate the effectiveness of linear regression for motion prediction of internal organs or tumors on 2D cine-MR and to present an online gating signal prediction scheme that can improve the accuracy of MR-guided radiotherapy for liver and lung cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe collected 2D cine-MR sequences of 21 liver cancer patients and 10 lung cancer patients to develop a binary gating signal prediction algorithm that forecasts the crossing-time of tumor motion traces relative to the target threshold. Both 0.4 s and 0.6 s prediction windows were tested using three linear predictors and three recurrent neural networks (RNNs), given the system delay of 0.5 s. Furthermore, an adaptive linear regression model was evaluated using only the first 30 s as the burn-in period, during which the model parameters were adapted during the online prediction process. The accuracy of the predicted traces was measured using amplitude metrics (MAE, RMSE, and R
resultsIn both 0.6 s and 0.4 s prediction cases, linear regression outperformed other methods, demonstrating significantly smaller amplitude errors compared to the RNNs (P < 0.05). The proposed algorithm with adaptive linear regression had the best performance with an average gating accuracy of 98.3% and 98.0%, a gating error of 44 ms and 45 ms, for liver cancer and lung cancer patients, respectively.
conclusionA functional online gating control scheme was developed with an adaptive linear regression that is both more cost-efficient and accurate than sophisticated RNN based methods in all studied metrics.
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.