ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Evaluation and mitigation of deformable image registration uncertainties for MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Segmentation regularized training for multi-domain deep learning registration applied to magnetic resonance-guided prostate cancer radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Robust organ mapped dose: using multiple image registrations to identify deformation uncertainty in radiation dose mapping.Physics in medicine and biology · 2026Article
- Deformable dose accumulation is required for adaptive radiotherapy practice.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Evaluation and mitigation of deformable image registration uncertainties for MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe evaluate the performance of a deformable image registration (DIR) software package in registering abdominal magnetic resonance images (MRIs) and then develop a mechanical modeling method to mitigate detected DIR uncertainties. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree evaluation metrics, namely mean displacement to agreement (MDA), DICE similarity coefficient (DSC), and standard deviation of Jacobian determinants (STD-JD), are used to assess the multi-modality (MM), contour-consistency (CC), and image-intensity (II)-based DIR algorithms in the MIM software package, as well as an in-house developed, contour matching-based finite element method (CM-FEM). Furthermore, we develop a hybrid FEM registration technique to modify the displacement vector field of each MIM registration. The MIM and FEM registrations were evaluated on MRIs obtained from 10 abdominal cancer patients. One-tailed Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney (WMW) tests were conducted to compare the MIM registrations with their FEM modifications.
resultsFor the registrations performed with the MIM-CC, MIM-MM, MIM-II, and CM-FEM algorithms, their average MDAs are 0.62 ± 0.27, 2.39 ± 1.30, 3.07 ± 2.42, 1.04 ± 0.72 mm, and average DSCs are 0.94 ± 0.03, 0.80 ± 0.12, 0.77 ± 0.15, 0.90 ± 0.11, respectively. The p-values of the WMW tests between the MIM registrations and their FEM modifications are less than 0.0084 for STD-JDs and greater than 0.87 for MDA and DSC.
conclusionsAmong the three MIM DIR algorithms, MIM-CC shows the smallest errors in terms of MDA and DSC but exhibits significant Jacobian uncertainties in the interior regions of abdominal organs. The hybrid FEM technique effectively mitigates the Jacobian uncertainties in these regions.
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.