Radio-luminescence (RL) optical fiber sensors enable a remote, punctual, and real time detection of ionizing radiation. However, the employment of such systems for monitoring extended radiation fields with energies above the Cerenkov threshold is still challenging, since a spurious luminescence, namely, the “stem effect,” is also generated in the passive fiber portion exposed to radiation. Here, we present experimental measurements on Yb-doped silica optical fibers irradiated with photon fields of different energies and sizes. The results demonstrate that the RL of Yb3+, displaying a sharp emission line at about 975 nm, is free from any spectral superposition with the spurious luminescence. This aspect, in addition with the suitable linearity, reproducibility, and sensitivity properties of the Yb-doped fibers, paves the way to their use in applications where an efficient stem effect removal is required.
Background Radiomics is expected to improve the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed at evaluating the impact of liver lesion contouring as a source of variability on radiomic features (RFs). Methods After Ethics Committee approval, 70 liver metastases in 17 CRC patients were segmented on contrast-enhanced computed tomography scans by two residents and checked by experienced radiologists. RFs from grey level co-occurrence and run length matrices were extracted from three-dimensional (3D) regions of interest (ROIs) and the largest two-dimensional (2D) ROIs. Inter-reader variability was evaluated with Dice coefficient and Hausdorff distance, whilst its impact on RFs was assessed using mean relative change (MRC) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For the main lesion of each patient, one reader also segmented a circular ROI on the same image used for the 2D ROI. Results The best inter-reader contouring agreement was observed for 2D ROIs according to both Dice coefficient (median 0.85, interquartile range 0.78–0.89) and Hausdorff distance (0.21 mm, 0.14–0.31 mm). Comparing RF values, MRC ranged 0–752% for 2D and 0–1567% for 3D. For 24/32 RFs (75%), MRC was lower for 2D than for 3D. An ICC > 0.90 was observed for more RFs for 2D (53%) than for 3D (34%). Only 2/32 RFs (6%) showed a variability between 2D and circular ROIs higher than inter-reader variability. Conclusions A 2D contouring approach may help mitigate overall inter-reader variability, albeit stable RFs can be extracted from both 3D and 2D segmentations of CRC liver metastases.
The aim of our study was to develop and validate a machine learning algorithm to predict response of individual HER2-amplified colorectal cancer liver metastases (lmCRC) undergoing dual HER2-targeted therapy. Twenty-four radiomics features were extracted after 3D manual segmentation of 141 lmCRC on pretreatment portal CT scans of a cohort including 38 HER2-amplified patients; feature selection was then performed using genetic algorithms. lmCRC were classified as nonresponders (R−), if their largest diameter increased more than 10% at a CT scan performed after 3 months of treatment, responders (R+) otherwise. Sensitivity, specificity, negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values in correctly classifying individual lesion and overall patient response were assessed on a training dataset and then validated on a second dataset using a Gaussian naïve Bayesian classifier. Per-lesion sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV were 89%, 85%, 93%, 78% and 90%, 42%, 73%, 71% respectively in the testing and validation datasets. Per-patient sensitivity and specificity were 92% and 86%. Heterogeneous response was observed in 9 of 38 patients (24%). Five of nine patients were carriers of nonresponder lesions correctly classified as such by our radiomics signature, including four of seven harboring only one nonresponder lesion. The developed method has been proven effective in predicting behavior of individual metastases to targeted treatment in a cohort of HER2 amplified patients. The model accurately detects responder lesions and identifies nonresponder lesions in patients with heterogeneous response, potentially paving the way to multimodal treatment in selected patients. Further validation will be needed to confirm our findings.
Purpose The capability of lung ultrasound (LUS) to distinguish the different pulmonary patterns of COVID-19 and quantify the disease burden compared to chest CT is still unclear. Methods PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients who underwent both LUS and chest CT at the Emergency Department were retrospectively analysed. In both modalities, twelve peripheral lung zones were identified and given a Severity Score basing on main lesion pattern. On CT scans the well-aerated lung volume (%WALV) was visually estimated. Per-patient and per-zone assessments of LUS classification performance taking CT findings as reference were performed, further revisioning the images in case of discordant results. Correlations between number of disease-positive lung zones, Severity Score and %WALV on both LUS and CT were assessed. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to determine LUS performance in detecting %WALV ≤ 70%. Results The study included 219 COVID-19 patients with abnormal chest CT. LUS correctly identified as positive 217 (99%) patients, but per-zone analysis showed sensitivity = 75% and specificity = 66%. The revision of the 121 (55%) cases with positive LUS and negative CT revealed COVID-compatible lesions in 42 (38%) CT scans. Number of disease-positive zones, Severity Score and %WALV between LUS and CT showed moderate correlations. The AUCs for LUS Severity Score and number of LUS-positive zones did not differ in detecting %WALV ≤ 70%. Conclusion LUS in COVID-19 is valuable for case identification but shows only moderate correlation with CT findings as for lesion patterns and severity quantification. The number of disease-positive lung zones in LUS alone was sufficient to discriminate relevant disease burden.
Background: Radiation dose in computed tomography (CT) has become a topic of high interest due to the increasing numbers of CT examinations performed worldwide. Hence, dose tracking and organ dose calculation software are increasingly used. We evaluated the organ dose variability associated with the use of different software applications or calculation methods. Methods: We tested four commercial software applications on CT protocols actually in use in our hospital: CT-Expo, NCICT, NCICTX, and Virtual Dose. We compared dose coefficients, estimated organ doses and effective doses obtained by the four software applications by varying exposure parameters. Our results were also compared with estimates reported by the software authors. Results: All four software applications showed dependence on tube voltage and volume CT dose index, while only CT-Expo was also dependent on other exposure parameters, in particular scanner model and pitch caused a variability till 50%. We found a disagreement between our results and those reported by the software authors (up to 600%), mainly due to a different extent of examined body regions. The relative range of the comparison of the four software applications was within 35% for most organs inside the scan region, but increased over the 100% for organs partially irradiated and outside the scan region. For effective doses, this variability was less evident (ranging from 9 to 36%). Conclusions: The two main sources of organ dose variability were the software application used and the scan region set. Dose estimate must be related to the process used for its calculation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.