ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Cumulative dose assessment with transformer-based deformable image registration addition for cervical cancer patients.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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.
- Cumulative dose assessment with transformer-based deformable image registration addition for cervical cancer patients.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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBased on the combination mode of internal and external radiotherapy for cervical cancer, this study aimed to investigate an accurate transformer-based deformable image registration (DIR) method for cumulative dose assessment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: According to a retrospective analysis conducted on 180 patients with cervical cancer who underwent intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), this study proposed a mix-transformer structure-based deformable image registration (MTDIR) network for registering CT scans of ICBT and EBRT, followed by dose accumulation and assessment. The mean dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD) of the rectum and bladder were computed to compare the performance of MTDIR with that of the state-of-the-art VoxelMorph method and the DIR method provided by velocity. Additionally, the cumulative dose of the bladder and rectum from four methods was calculated: direct DVH parameter addition (DA), DIR-based dose addition provided by Velocity (VA), VoxelMorph-based dose addition (VoA), and MTDIR-based dose addition (MA).
resultsThe mean DSC values of MTDIR, VoxelMorph, and Velocity for the bladder were 0.78, 0.75, and 0.72 for the registration between CT scans of EBRT and the last ICBT, respectively. The mean DSC values of the rectum were also equal to 0.58, 0.56, and 0.52. The mean HDmean values of MTDIR, VoxelMorph, and Velocity for the bladder were 4.81, 5.16, and 5.43, and the mean HDmean values of the rectum were 5.41, 5.81, and 6.93, respectively. For the registration between CT scans of ICBT, the mean DSC values of MTDIR, VoxelMorph, and Velocity for the bladder were obtained 0.82, 0.80, and 0.77, and the mean DSC values for the rectum were equal to 0.70, 0.68, and 0.63, respectively. The mean HDmean values of MTDIR, VoxelMorph, and Velocity for the bladder were 4.22, 4.58, and 4.79, and the mean HDmean values of the rectum were obtained 4.86, 5.17, and 5.64, respectively. The results generally suggested that MTDIR outperformed VoxelMorph and Velocity.
conclusionsThe study findings demonstrated that the model developed based on parameters obtained from the proposed method exhibited higher registration accuracy.
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.