ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2025
Deformable registration for nasopharyngeal carcinoma using adaptive mask and weight allocation strategy based CycleFCNs model.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Univariate and multivariate analysis of the styrofoam fixation device on patient setup errors in radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDeformable registration plays an important role in the accurate delineation of tumors. Most of the existing deep learning methods ignored two issues that can lead to inaccurate registration, including the limited field of view in MR scans and the different scanning angles that can exist between multimodal images. The purpose of this study is to improve the registration accuracy between CT and MR for nasopharyngeal carcinoma cases.
methods269 cases were enrolled in the study, and 188 cases were designated for training, while a separate set of 81 cases was reserved for testing. Each case had a CT volume and a T1-MR volume. The treatment table was removed from their CT images. The CycleFCNs model was used for deformable registration, and two strategies including adaptive mask registration strategy and weight allocation strategy were adopted for training. Dice similarity coefficient, Hausdorff distance, precision, and recall were calculated for normal tissues of CT-MR image pairs, before and after the registration. Three deformable registration methods including RayStation, Elastix, and VoxelMorph were compared with the proposed method.
resultsThe registration results of RayStation and Elastix are essentially consistent. Upon employing the VoxelMorph model and the proposed method for registration, a clear trend of increased dice similarity coefficient and decreased hausdorff distance can be observed. It is noteworthy that for the temporomandibular joint, pituitary, optic nerve, and optic chiasma, the proposed method has improved the average dice similarity coefficient from 0.86 to 0.91, 0.87 to 0.93, 0.85 to 0.89, and 0.77 to 0.83, respectively, as compared to RayStation. Additionally, within the same anatomical structures, the average hausdorff distance has been decreased from 2.98 mm to 2.28 mm, 1.83 mm to 1.53 mm, 3.74 mm to 3.56 mm, and 5.94 mm to 5.87 mm. Compared to the original CycleFCNs model, the improved model has significantly enhanced the dice similarity coefficient of the brainstem, pituitary gland, and optic nerve (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe proposed method significantly improved the registration accuracy for multi-modal medical images in NPC cases. These findings have important clinical implications, as increased registration accuracy can lead to more precise tumor segmentation, optimized treatment planning, and ultimately, improved patient outcomes.
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.