Med Phys
-
Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has been shown to have great clinical potential as a supplement to magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of prostate cancer (CaP). MRS provides functional information in the form of changes in the relative concentration of specific metabolites including choline, creatine, and citrate which can be used to identify potential areas of CaP. With a view to assisting radiologists in interpretation and analysis of MRS data, some researchers have begun to develop computer-aided detection (CAD) schemes for CaP identification from spectroscopy. ⋯ In addition, the scheme was found to be robust to changes in system parameters. For 6 of the 18 studies an expert radiologist laboriously labeled each of the individual spectra according to a five point scale, with 1/2 representing spectra that the expert considered normal and 3/4/5 being spectra the expert deemed suspicious. When evaluated on these expert annotated datasets, the CAD system yielded an average sensitivity (cluster corresponding to suspicious spectra being identified as the CaP class) and specificity of 81.39% and 64.71%, respectively.
-
Matching the penumbra of a 6 MeV electron beam to the penumbra of a 6 MV photon beam is a dose optimization challenge, especially when the electron beam is applied from an extended source-to-surface distance (SSD), as in the case of some head and neck treatments. Traditionally low melting point alloy blocks have been used to define the photon beam shielding over the spinal cord region. However, these are inherently time consuming to construct and employ in the clinical situation. Multileaf collimators (MLCs) provide a fast and reproducible shielding option but generate geometrically nonconformal approximations to the desired beam edge definition. The effects of substituting Cerrobend for the MLC shielding mode in the context of beam matching with extended-SSD electron beams are the subject of this investigation. ⋯ The weighted DDVH comparison techniques allowed the composite dosimetry resulting from the interplay of the abovementioned variables to be ranked. The MLC dosimetry ranked as good or better than that resulting from beam matching with Cerrobend for all except large field overlaps (-2.5 mm gap). The results for the linear-weighted DDVH comparison suggest that optimal MLC abutment dosimetry results from an optical surface gap of around 1 +/- 0.5 mm. Furthermore, this appears reasonably lenient to abutment gap variation, such as that arising from uncertainty in beam markup or other setup errors.