ArticleArXiv2025
Derivation of Tissue Properties from Basis-Vector Model Weights for Dual-Energy CT-Based Monte Carlo Proton Beam Dose Calculations.
Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We propose a novel method, basis vector model material indexing (BVM-MI), for predicting atomic composition and mass density from two independent basis vector model weights derived from dual-energy CT (DECT) for Monte Carlo (MC) dose planning. BVM-MI employs multiple linear regression on BVM weights and their quotient to predict elemental composition and mass density for 70 representative tissues. Predicted values were imported into the TOPAS MC code to simulate proton dose deposition to a uniform cylinder phantom composed of each tissue type. The performance of BVM-MI was compared to the conventional Hounsfield Unit material indexing method (HU-MI), which estimates elemental composition and density based on CT numbers (HU). Evaluation metrics included absolute errors in predicted elemental compositions and relative percent errors in calculated mass density and mean excitation energy. Dose distributions were assessed by quantifying absolute error in the depth of 80% maximum scored dose (R80) and relative percent errors in stopping power (SP) between MC simulations using HU-MI, BVM-MI, and benchmark compositions. Lateral dose profiles were analyzed at R80 and Bragg Peak (RBP) depths for three tissues showing the largest discrepancies in R80 depth. BVM-MI outperformed HU-MI in elemental composition predictions, with mean RMSEs of 1.30% (soft tissue) and 0.1% (bony tissue), compared to 4.20% and 1.9% for HU-MI. R80 depth RMSEs were 0.2 mm (soft) and 0.1 mm (bony) for BVM-MI, vs. 1.8 mm and 0.7 mm for HU-MI. Lateral dose profile analysis showed overall smaller dose errors for BVM-MI across core, halo, and proximal aura regions. In conclusion, fully utilizing the two-parameter BVM space for material indexing led to significantly improved TOPAS MC dose calculations over the conventional HU-MI method, demonstrating BVM-MI's potential to enhance proton therapy planning.
Identifiers
41019215PMC12461798What 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.