ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Evaluation of the reliability of markerless tumor tracking with single-energy and dual-energy imaging using machine learning.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026. 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
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
backgroundMarkerless tumor tracking (MTT) using single-energy (SE) kilovoltage (kV) imaging has been proposed as a technique for lung tumor motion management. However, bony structures can obscure the tumor and make tracking challenging. Dual-energy (DE) subtraction imaging can suppress the bone and therefore enhance tumor visibility, potentially improving tracking accuracy. PURPOSE: To develop a machine learning model that predicts the reliability of MTT for SE and DE imaging using phantom and patient data.
methodsImages were collected at high and low energy (120/60 kV) using fast-kV switching on dynamic thorax phantom with 5-15 diameter targets and 20 lung cancer patients, including one patient with two tumor locations. DE images were then generated off-line using weighted logarithmic subtraction. Separately, a template-based tracking algorithm was used to track the tumor on both phantom and patient images. For phantom data, the ground truth (GT) was defined by the cos
resultsFor both SE-LR and DE-LR models, PSR has the largest coefficient value, indicating that it is the most influential factor when determining the reliability of tracking. At a specificity of 95%, the DE-LR model achieved significantly higher sensitivity than the SE-LR model (0.908 vs. 0.731, p < 0.01 for phantom data and 0.657 vs. 0.589, p < 0.01 for patient data). In the three held-out patients, the DE-LR model outperformed the SE-LR model across all metrics. The largest gains were found in the patient with good tracking quality.
conclusionsThe proposed LR models successfully predicted the reliability of SE- and DE-MTT. Across phantom and patient datasets, the DE-LR model consistently demonstrated improved performance compared with the SE-LR model, suggesting that DE imaging may be beneficial for MTT applications.
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.