Forecasting model for qualitative prediction of the results of patient-specific quality assurance based on planning and complexity metrics and their interrelations. Pilot study.

IF 1.2 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy Pub Date : 2024-07-22 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5603/rpor.101093
Tomasz Piotrowski, Adam Ryczkowski, Petros Kalendralis, Marcin Adamczewski, Piotr Sadowski, Barbara Bajon, Marta Kruszyna-Mochalska, Agata Jodda
{"title":"Forecasting model for qualitative prediction of the results of patient-specific quality assurance based on planning and complexity metrics and their interrelations. Pilot study.","authors":"Tomasz Piotrowski, Adam Ryczkowski, Petros Kalendralis, Marcin Adamczewski, Piotr Sadowski, Barbara Bajon, Marta Kruszyna-Mochalska, Agata Jodda","doi":"10.5603/rpor.101093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose was to analyse the interrelations between planning and complexity metrics and gamma passing rates (GPRs) obtained from VMAT treatments and build the forecasting models for qualitative prediction (QD) of GPRs results.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>802 treatment arcs from the plans prepared for the head and neck, thorax, abdomen, and pelvic cancers were analysed. The plans were verified by portal dosimetry and analysed twice using the gamma method with 3%|2mm and 2%|2mm acceptance criteria. The tolerance limit of GPR was 95%. Red, yellow, and green QDs were established for GPR examination. The interrelations were examined, as well as the analysis of effective differentiation of QD. Three models for QD forecasting based on discriminant analysis (DA), random decision forest (RDF) methods, and the hybrid model (HM) were built and evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the interrelations were small or moderate. The exception is correlations of the join function with the average number of monitor units per control point (R = 0.893) and the beam aperture with planning target volume (R = 0.897). While many metrics allow for the effective separation of the QDs from each other, the study shows that predicting the values of the QD is possible only through multi-component forecasting models, of which the HM is the most accurate (0.894).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Of the three models explored in this study, the HM, which uses DA methods to predict red QD and RDF methods to predict green and yellow QDs, is the most promising one.</p>","PeriodicalId":47283,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy","volume":"29 3","pages":"318-328"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11321782/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/rpor.101093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The purpose was to analyse the interrelations between planning and complexity metrics and gamma passing rates (GPRs) obtained from VMAT treatments and build the forecasting models for qualitative prediction (QD) of GPRs results.

Materials and method: 802 treatment arcs from the plans prepared for the head and neck, thorax, abdomen, and pelvic cancers were analysed. The plans were verified by portal dosimetry and analysed twice using the gamma method with 3%|2mm and 2%|2mm acceptance criteria. The tolerance limit of GPR was 95%. Red, yellow, and green QDs were established for GPR examination. The interrelations were examined, as well as the analysis of effective differentiation of QD. Three models for QD forecasting based on discriminant analysis (DA), random decision forest (RDF) methods, and the hybrid model (HM) were built and evaluated.

Results: Most of the interrelations were small or moderate. The exception is correlations of the join function with the average number of monitor units per control point (R = 0.893) and the beam aperture with planning target volume (R = 0.897). While many metrics allow for the effective separation of the QDs from each other, the study shows that predicting the values of the QD is possible only through multi-component forecasting models, of which the HM is the most accurate (0.894).

Conclusion: Of the three models explored in this study, the HM, which uses DA methods to predict red QD and RDF methods to predict green and yellow QDs, is the most promising one.

基于计划性和复杂性指标及其相互关系的患者质量保证结果定性预测模型。试点研究。
研究背景:材料与方法:分析了头颈部、胸部、腹部和盆腔癌症治疗计划中的802条治疗弧线。这些计划通过门静脉剂量测定进行验证,并使用伽马射线法进行了两次分析,接受标准分别为 3%|2mm 和 2%|2mm。GPR 的容限为 95%。为 GPR 检查建立了红色、黄色和绿色 QD。研究了相互关系,并分析了 QD 的有效区分。建立并评估了基于判别分析(DA)、随机决策森林(RDF)和混合模型(HM)的三种 QD 预测模型:结果:大多数相互关系较小或适中。例外情况是连接功能与每个控制点的平均监控单元数相关(R = 0.893),光束孔径与规划目标体积相关(R = 0.897)。虽然许多指标可以有效地将 QD 相互分离,但研究表明,只有通过多成分预测模型才能预测 QD 的值,其中 HM 是最准确的(0.894):在本研究探索的三种模型中,使用 DA 方法预测红色 QD,使用 RDF 方法预测绿色和黄色 QD 的 HM 是最有前途的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
115
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy is an interdisciplinary bimonthly journal, publishing original contributions in clinical oncology and radiotherapy, as well as in radiotherapy physics, techniques and radiotherapy equipment. Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy is a journal of the Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, the Czech Society of Radiation Oncology, the Hungarian Society for Radiation Oncology, the Slovenian Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, the Polish Study Group of Head and Neck Cancer, the Guild of Bulgarian Radiotherapists and the Greater Poland Cancer Centre, affiliated with the Spanish Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology, the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and the Portuguese Society of Radiotherapy - Oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信