Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
470
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
470 results for “Evaluation dataset”
Dataset related to article "Hypofractionation with simultaneous boost in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy A prospective evaluation of a case series and review of the literature"
<p>This record contains raw data related to article "Hypofractionation with simultaneous boost in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy A prospective evaluation of a case series and review of the literature"</p> <p>To evaluate acute toxicity and cosmetic outcomes of hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) as adjuvant treatment after breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy and to review the association of chemotherapy and short fractionation with boost.</p> <p>MATERIALS AND METHODS:</p> <p>Patients presenting early-stage breast cancer were enrolled in a phase II trial. All patients received VMAT-SIB technique to the whole breast and tumor bed in 15 fractions, for a total dose of 40.5 and 48 Gy. Acute and late skin toxicities and breast pain were recorded. Cosmetic outcomes were also assessed as excellent/good or fair/poor.</p> <p>RESULTS:</p> <p>Between August 2010 and December 2015, 787 consecutive patients were treated and had at least 2 year follow-up. A subset of 175 patients underwent adjuvant chemotherapy (median age of 55 years) and was analysed. The median follow up was 39 months (range 24-80). At the end of RT treatment, skin toxicity was G1 in 51.1% of patients, G2 in 9.7%. At 2 years of follow up, it was G1 in 13.5% of patients, no cases ≥ G2; cosmetic outcome was excellent in 63.5% and good in 36.5% of the patients. No significant difference compared to the patients without systemic therapy was observed.</p> <p>CONCLUSION:</p> <p>Hypofractionated VMAT-SIB in patients who had undergone adjuvant systemic therapy was safe and well tolerated in terms of acute and early late settings and cosmesis. Our data confirmed the results of other studies published on the association of hypofractionation and chemotherapy or concomitant boost.</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p>
Dataset related to article "Evaluation of target dose inhomogeneity in breast cancer treatment due to tissue elemental differences"
<p>This record contains raw data related to article "Evaluation of target dose inhomogeneity in breast cancer treatment due to tissue elemental differences"</p> <p>BACKGROUND:</p> <p>Monte Carlo simulations were run to estimate the dose variations generated by thedifference arising from the chemical composition of the tissues.</p> <p>METHODS:</p> <p>CT datasets of five breast cancer patients were selected. Mammary gland was delineated as clinical target volume CTV, as well as CTV_lob and CTV_fat, being the lobular and fat fractions of the entire mammary gland. Patients were planned for volumetric modulated arc therapy technique, optimized in the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system. CT, structures and plans were imported in PRIMO, based on Monte Carlo code Penelope, to run three simulations: AdiMus, where the adipose and muscle tissues were automatically assigned to fat and lobular fractions of the breast; Adi and Mus, where adipose and muscle, respectively were assigned to the whole mammary gland. The specific tissue density was kept identical from the CT dataset. Differences in mean doses in the CTV_lob and CTV_fat structures were evaluated for the different tissue assignments. Differences generated by the tissue composition and estimated by Acuros dose calculations in Eclipse were also analysed.</p> <p>RESULTS:</p> <p>From Monte Carlo simulations, the dose in the lobular fraction of the breast, when adipose tissue is assigned in place of muscle, is overestimated by 1.25 ± 0.45%; the dose in the fat fraction of the breast with muscle tissue assignment is underestimated by 1.14 ± 0.51%. Acuros showed an overestimation of 0.98 ± 0.06% and an underestimation of 0.21 ± 0.14% in the lobular and fat portions, respectively. Reason of this dissimilarity resides in the fact that the two calculations, Monte Carlo and Acuros, differently manage the range of CT numbers and the material assignments, having Acuros an overlapping range, where two tissues are both present in defined proportions.</p> <p>CONCLUSION:</p> <p>Although not clinically significant, the dose deposition difference in the lobular and connective fat fraction of the breast tissue lead to an improved knowledge of the possible dose distribution and homogeneity in the breast radiation treatment</p>
Dataset for evaluating the long-wave radiation scheme in the CMA-MESO model
<p>This dataset is designed to evaluate the downward long-wave irradiance predicted by the CMA-MESO model, and it is also can be used to other related researches.</p>
Demo dataset for publication "Development of image analysis tool to evaluate Langerhans cell migration after exposure to isothiazolinones"
<p>This dataset consists of a QuPath project and two images that can be used to test the scripts produced by the publication </p> <p>"Development of image analysis tool to evaluate Langerhans cell migration after exposure to isothiazolinones"</p>
XDF: A Large-Scale Dataset for Evaluating Video Deepfake Detection Across Multiple Manipulation Techniques
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Figure datasets for evaluation of ISO 10993-5 in vitro cytotoxicity tests for extracellular matrix-based biomaterials
<p>This folder contains all datasets used to create figures, including Excel files, images, pictoric representation and GraphPad files.</p> <p> </p>
Dataset related to article "Prospective evaluation of the role of imaging techniques and TMPRSS2:ERG mutation for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer "
<p>This record contains raw data related to article “Prospective evaluation of the role of imaging techniques and TMPRSS2:ERG mutation for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer"</p> <p>Abstract</p> <p><strong>Objectives: </strong> To test the hypothesis of a relationship between a specific genetic lesion (T2:ERG) and imaging scores, such as PI-RADS and PRI-MUS, and to test the effectiveness of these parameters for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa).</p> <p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong> This is a prospective study of men with suspected PCa enrolled between 2016 and 2019 at a high-volume tertiary hospital. Patients underwent systematic US-guided biopsy, plus targeted biopsy if they were presenting with >=1 suspicious lesion (PI-RADS>2) at mpMRI or PR-IMUS >2 at micro-ultrasound assessment. For each patient, one core from the highest PI-RADS or PRI-MUS lesion was collected for T2:ERG analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models (LRMs) were fitted for csPCa with a clinical model (age, total PSA, previous biopsy, family history for PCa), a clinical plus PI-RADS, clinical plus T2:ERG, clinical plus PI-RADS plus T2:ERG, and T2:ERG plus PI-RADS alone.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong> The cohort consists of 158 patients: 83.5% and 66.2% had respectively a diagnosis of PCa and csPCa after biopsy. A T2:ERG fusion was found in 37 men and 97.3% of these patients harbored PCa, while 81.1% were diagnosed with csPCa. SE of T2:ERG assay for csPCa was 28.8%, SP 87.0%, NPV 38.8%, and PPV 81.1%. Of 105 patients who performed mpMRI 93.% had PIRADS ≥3. SE of mpMRI for csPCa was 98.5%, SP was 12.8%, NPV was 83.3%, and PPV was 65.7%. Among 67 patients who were subjected to micro-US, 90% had a PRI-MUS ≥3. SE of micro-US for csPCa was 89.1%, SP was 9.52%, NPV was 28.6%, and PPV was 68.3%. At univariable LRM T2:ERG was confirmed as independent of mpMRI and micro-US result (OR 1.49, p=0.133 and OR 1.82, p=0.592, respectively). At multivariable LRM the clinical model alone had an AUC for csPCa of 0.74 while the clinical model including PI-RADS and T2:ERG achieved an AUC of 0.83.</p> <p><strong>Conclusions: </strong> T2:ERG translocation and imaging results are independent of each other, but both are related csPCa. To evaluate the best diagnostic work-up for PCa and csPCa detection, all available tools (T2:ERG detection and imaging techniques) should be employed together as they appear to have a complementary role.</p>
Dataset related to article "An approach to evaluate the quality of radiological reports in Head and Neck cancer loco-regional staging: experience of two Academic Hospitals "
<p>This record contains raw data related to article “An approach to evaluate the quality of radiological reports in Head and Neck cancer loco-regional staging: experience of two Academic Hospitals"</p> <p>Abstract</p> <p><strong>Objectives: </strong> To evaluate the quality of the reports of loco-regional staging computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in head and neck (H&N) cancer.</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong> Consecutive reports of staging CT and MRI of all H&N cancer cases from 2018 to 2020 were collected. We created lists of quality indicators for tumor (T) for each district and for node (N). We marked these as 0 or 1 in the report calculating a report score (RS) and a maximum sum (MS) of each list. Two radiologists and two otolaryngologists in consensus classified reports as low quality (LQ) if the RS fell in the percentage range 0-59% of MS and as high quality (HQ) if it fell in the range 60-100%, annotating technique and district. We evaluated the distribution of reports in these categories.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong> Two hundred thirty-seven reports (97 CT and 140 MRI) of 95 oral cavity, 52 laryngeal, 47 oropharyngeal, 19 hypo-pharyngeal, 14 parotid, and 10 nasopharyngeal cancers were included. Sixty-six percent of all the reports were LQ for T, 66% out of all the MRI reports, and 65% out of all CT reports were LQ. Eight-five percent of reports were HQ for N, 85% out of all the MRI reports, and 82% out of all CT reports were HQ. Reports of oral cavity, oro-nasopharynx, and parotid were LQ, respectively, in 76%, 73%, 100% and 92 out of cases.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Reports of staging CT/MRI in H&N cancer were LQ for T description and HQ for N description.</p>
A Dataset for Evaluating and Validating Blood Perfusion Monitoring During an Occlusion Protocol: Multi-spectral and Plethysmography data
<p>The dataset contains multispectral images and PPG data from 45 subjects who underwent an occlusion protocol to induce changes in blood perfusion in the dominant hand. All the partipiants signed an informed consent.</p> <p><strong>Blood perfusion</strong></p> <p>Blood perfusion refers to the passage of oxygen and other nutrients through the circulatory system. We look to provide data for the evaluation of non-invasive approaches based on multi-spectral images. PPG reference data from the thumb is provided for validation purposes.</p> <p><strong>Occlusion Protocol</strong></p> <p>The occlusion protocol for each participant lasts around 10 minutes.</p> <p>The participants were seated, and their superior limbs were extended on a table. An automatic blood pressure monitor measured their systolic and diastolic pressures. A blood cuff was placed in their dominant arm, and a PPG sensor MAX30102 (Maxim Integrated, CA, United States) was placed in their thumb finger. A multispectral camera was positioned above to record the hand palm throughout the protocol. The camera employed is a CMS-V1-C-EVR1M-USB3 (SILIOS Technologies SA., France), which records 9 multispectral channels in the VNIR region of the spectrum.</p> <p>.</p> <p>The protocol is divided into 5 stages, each one lasts 2 minutes.</p> <ol> <li><strong>Start:</strong> No pressure is applied</li> <li><strong>Vascular Occlusion:</strong> a fixed pressure of 60 mmHg is applied through the blood cuff</li> <li><strong>Rest:</strong> The pressure is liberated</li> <li><strong>Total Occlusion:</strong> A pressure equal to the initial systolic pressure plus 20 mmHg is constantly applied.</li> <li><strong>Hyperemia:</strong> The pressure is released.</li> </ol> <p><strong>Data available: </strong></p> <p>The multispectral datasets for each subject are contained in a <strong>P#.7z</strong> file. Single-channel images are included. The name of each file specifies the participant ID, the time (minutes_seconds_milliseconds) of the acquisition with respect to the start of the occlusion protocol, the multispectral dataset, and the corresponding multispectral channel.</p> <p>Example: the following file name specifies a file for participant number 21. The data was captured at 9 minutes and 59.5290 seconds after the start of the occlusion protocol. The image corresponds to the first channel (the count starts at 0).</p> <p>P21_09_59_5290_d02459_channel0.png</p> <p>Files containing masks for each dataset are available for the whole hand region <strong>(hand_masks.7z)</strong> and the middle finger <strong>(finger_masks.7z)</strong>. Finger masks for participants with a lot of movement are not available.</p> <p>The PPG data is stored in a simple csv file with txt extension for each participant. It contains the Red and Infrared channel data as well as the acquisition time of each sample. The PPG data for all the participants are contained in the compressed file <strong>PPG.7z</strong>.</p> <p>Reference multispectral images for calibration are also provided in the file <strong>Calibration.7z</strong>. This file contains multispectral images with the cap on (Dark_Reference) plus three folders with reference images taken during the same session as the participants. </p> <p>reference_set_A: = P1 to P10<br> reference_set_B: = P11 to P30<br> reference_set_C: = P31 to P45</p> <p>each folder contains multispectral images of different white reference materials which can be employed for different calibration methods: </p> <p>WhiteA = white tile <br> WhiteB = white reference bar <br> WhiteP = sheet of white paper<br> WhiteT = Teflon (<em>PTFE</em>) <em>sheets</em></p> <p><strong>The participant’s data is summarized in the next table.</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>ID </strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Age </strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Gender </strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Skin type </strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Systolic Pressure </strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong># Multi-spectral Datasets</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P1</p> </td> <td> <p>20</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>109</p> </td> <td> <p>2,456</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P2</p> </td> <td> <p>20</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>129</p> </td> <td> <p>2,458</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P3</p> </td> <td> <p>22</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>117</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P4</p> </td> <td> <p>19</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>110</p> </td> <td> <p>2,454</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P5</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>106</p> </td> <td> <p>2,458</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P6</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>111</p> </td> <td> <p>2,471</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P7</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>91</p> </td> <td> <p>2,462</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P8</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>102</p> </td> <td> <p>2,474</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P9</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>113</p> </td> <td> <p>2,468</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P10</p> </td> <td> <p>19</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>108</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P11</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>137</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P12</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>132</p> </td> <td> <p>2,457</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P13</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>119</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P14</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>100</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P15</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>104</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P16</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>126</p> </td> <td> <p>2,462</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P17*</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>105</p> </td> <td> <p>2,469</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P18</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>122</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P19</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>130</p> </td> <td> <p>2,462</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P20</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>106</p> </td> <td> <p>2,457</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P21</p> </td> <td> <p>23</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>133</p> </td> <td> <p>2,459</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P22</p> </td> <td> <p>23</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>134</p> </td> <td> <p>2,471</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P23</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>115</p> </td> <td> <p>2,472</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P24</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>111</p> </td> <td> <p>2,445</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P25</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>116</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P26</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>107</p> </td> <td> <p>2,462</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P27</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>106</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P28</p> </td> <td> <p>24</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>106</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P29</p> </td> <td> <p>22</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>125</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P30</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>125</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P31</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>100</p> </td> <td> <p>2,472</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P32</p> </td> <td> <p>22</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>120</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P33</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>127</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P34</p> </td> <td> <p>19</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>100</p> </td> <td> <p>2,457</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P35</p> </td> <td> <p>19</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>108</p> </td> <td> <p>2,460</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P36</p> </td> <td> <p>20</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>136</p> </td> <td> <p>2,471</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P37</p> </td> <td> <p>19</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>129</p> </td> <td> <p>2,457</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P38*</p> </td> <td> <p>19</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>128</p> </td> <td> <p>2,463</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P39*</p> </td> <td> <p>18</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>111</p> </td> <td> <p>2,479</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P40</p> </td> <td> <p>23</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>110</p> </td> <td> <p>2,462</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P41</p> </td> <td> <p>21</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>130</p> </td> <td> <p>2,465</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P42</p> </td> <td> <p>20</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>126</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P43</p> </td> <td> <p>22</p> </td> <td> <p>F</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>125</p> </td> <td> <p>2,459</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P44</p> </td> <td> <p>22</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>3</p> </td> <td> <p>138</p> </td> <td> <p>2,467</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>P45</p> </td> <td> <p>22</p> </td> <td> <p>M</p> </td> <td> <p>4</p> </td> <td> <p>104</p> </td> <td> <p>2,461</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p>Table 1.- Participant's ID and relevant information.Participants with an * presented a lot of movement during the recording.</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>
Dataset related to article "Adjuvant volumetric modulated arc therapy compared to 3D conformal radiation therapy for newly diagnosed soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities: outcome and toxicity evaluation."
<p>OBJECTIVE:</p> <p>To assess the impact of adjuvant volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) compared with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) in terms of toxicity and local control (LC) in patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities.</p> <p>METHODS:</p> <p>From 2004 to 2016, 109 patients were treated, initially using 3DCRT and subsequently with VMAT. Clinical outcome was evaluated by contrast-enhanced MRI, thoracic and abdominal CT 3 months after treatments and then every 6 months. Toxicity was evaluated with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scale v. 4.3.</p> <p>RESULTS:</p> <p>Patients presented Stage III soft tissue sarcoma disease (77%), localized tumor (95%) at the lower extremity (87%), adipocytic histotype (46%). Surgical resection was performed in all patients, followed by adjuvant 3DCRT in 38, and VMAT in 71. The median total dose was 66 Gy/33 fractions (range 60-70 Gy;25-35 fractions). More successful bone sparing was recorded using VMAT (<em>p</em> < 0.001). Median follow-up was 61 months, 93 and 58 months for 3DCRT and VMAT group, respectively. The 2- and 5 year LC were 95.3±2.1%, and 87.4±3.4% for the whole cohort, 92.0±4.5%, 82.9±6.4% for 3DCRT, 97.1±2.0%, 89.6±4.1% for VMAT (<em>p</em> = 0.150). On univariate and multivariate analysis the factors recorded as conditioning LC were the status of the surgical resection margins (<em>p</em> = 0.028) and the total dose delivered (<em>p</em> = 0.013).</p> <p>CONCLUSION:</p> <p>The availability of modern radiotherapy technique permit a better conformity on the target with maximum sparing of normal tissue and acceptable side-effects. VMAT is a safe and feasible treatment with limited rate of toxicity, compared to 3DCRT. Results on LC of VMAT are encouraging.</p> <p>ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:</p> <p>Soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities can benefit from the use of VMAT, with a reduction of the high dose to bones to avoid radiation osteonecrosis. An adequate total dose of at least 66 Gy and a radical surgical margin allow a good local control.</p>
CIMAS economic evaluation dataset. San Piero a Grado, Pisa
<p>Dataset of economic parameters of a LTE conducted in San Piero a Grado, Pisa (Italy) (Italian language)</p>
Dataset related to article "Evaluation of plan complexity and dosimetric plan quality of total marrow and lymphoid irradiation using volumetric modulated arc therapy"
<p>This record contains raw data related to article "Evaluation of plan complexity and dosimetric plan quality of total marrow and lymphoid irradiation using volumetric modulated arc therapy"</p><p> Abstract</p><p>Purpose: To assess the impact of the planner's experience and optimization algorithm on the plan quality and complexity of total marrow and lymphoid irradiation (TMLI) delivered by means of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) over 2010-2022 at our institute.</p><p>Methods: Eighty-two consecutive TMLI plans were considered. Three complexity indices were computed to characterize the plans in terms of leaf gap size, irregularity of beam apertures, and modulation complexity. Dosimetric points of the target volume (D2%) and organs at risk (OAR) (Dmean) were automatically extracted to combine them with plan complexity and obtain a global quality score (GQS). The analysis was stratified based on the different optimization algorithms used over the years, including a knowledge-based (KB) model. Patient-specific quality assurance (QA) using Portal Dosimetry was performed retrospectively, and the gamma agreement index (GAI) was investigated in conjunction with plan complexity.</p><p>Results: Plan complexity significantly reduced over the years (r = -0.50, p < 0.01). Significant differences in plan complexity and plan dosimetric quality among the different algorithms were observed. Moreover, the KB model allowed to achieve significantly better dosimetric results to the OARs. The plan quality remained similar or even improved during the years and when moving to a newer algorithm, with GQS increasing from 0.019 ± 0.002 to 0.025 ± 0.003 (p < 0.01). The significant correlation between GQS and time (r = 0.33, p = 0.01) indicated that the planner's experience was relevant to improve the plan quality of TMLI plans. Significant correlations between the GAI and the complexity metrics (r = -0.71, p < 0.01) were also found.</p><p>Conclusion: Both the planner's experience and algorithm version are crucial to achieve an optimal plan quality in TMLI plans. Thus, the impact of the optimization algorithm should be carefully evaluated when a new algorithm is introduced and in system upgrades. Knowledge-based strategies can be useful to increase standardization and improve plan quality of TMLI treatments</p>
Dataset related to article "Evaluation of Semen Self-Sampling Yield Predictors and CTC Isolation by Multi-Color Flow Cytometry for Liquid Biopsy of Localized Prostate Cancer"
<p><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p>Liquid biopsy (LB) for prostate cancer (PCa) detection could represent an alternative to biopsy. Seminal fluid (SF) is a source of PCa-specific biomarkers, as 40% of ejaculate derives from the prostate. We tested the feasibility of an SF-based LB by evaluating the yield of semen self-sampling in a cohort of >750 patients with clinically localized PCa. The overall SF collection yield was 18.2% (39% when considering only compliant patients), with about a half of the patients (53.15%) not consenting to SF donation. Independent favorable predictors for SF collection were younger age and lower prostate volume. We implemented a protocol to enrich prostate-derived cells by multi-color flow cytometry and applied it on SF and urine samples from 100 patients. The number of prostate-enriched cells (SYTO-16+ PSMA+ CD45-) was variable, with higher numbers of cells isolated from SF than urine (<i>p</i> value < 0.001). Putative cancer cells (EpCAMhigh) were 2% of isolated cells in both specimens. The fraction of EpCAMhigh cells over prostate-enriched cells (PSMA+) significantly correlated with patient age in both semen and urine, but not with other clinical parameters, such as Gleason Score, ISUP, or TNM stage. Hence, enumeration of prostate-derived cells is not sufficient to guide PCa diagnosis; additional molecular analyses to detect patient-specific cancer lesions will be needed</p>
Dataset related to article "Connecting the use of innovative treatments and glucocorticoids with the multidisciplinary evaluation through rule-based natural-language processing: a real-world study on patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis"
<p>This record contains raw data related to article "Connecting the use of innovative treatments and glucocorticoids with the multidisciplinary evaluation through rule-based natural-language processing: a real-world study on patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis"</p><p>Abstract</p><p>Background: The impact of a multidisciplinary management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and psoriasis on systemic glucocorticoids or innovative treatments remains unknown. Rule-based natural language processing and text extraction help to manage large datasets of unstructured information and provide insights into the profile of treatment choices.</p><p>Methods: We obtained structured information from text data of outpatient visits between 2017 and 2022 using regular expressions (RegEx) to define elastic search patterns and to consider only affirmative citation of diseases or prescribed therapy by detecting negations. Care processes were described by binary flags which express the presence of RA, PsA and psoriasis and the prescription of glucocorticoids and biologics or small molecules in each cases. Logistic regression analyses were used to train the classifier to predict outcomes using the number of visits and the other specialist visits as the main variables.</p><p>Results: We identified 1743 patients with RA, 1359 with PsA and 2,287 with psoriasis, accounting for 5,677, 4,468 and 7,770 outpatient visits, respectively. Among these, 25% of RA, 32% of PsA and 25% of psoriasis cases received biologics or small molecules, while 49% of RA, 28% of PsA, and 40% of psoriasis cases received glucocorticoids. Patients evaluated also by other specialists were treated more frequently with glucocorticoids (70% vs. 49% for RA, 60% vs. 28% for PsA, 51% vs. 40% for psoriasis; p < 0.001) as well as with biologics/small molecules (49% vs. 25% for RA, 64% vs. 32% in PsA; 51% vs. 25% for psoriasis; p < 0.001) compared to cases seen only by the main specialist.</p><p>Conclusion: Patients with RA, PsA, or psoriasis undergoing multiple evaluations are more likely to receive innovative treatments or glucocorticoids, possibly reflecting more complex cases.</p><p> </p>
Dataset related to article "Adaptive Volumetric-Modulated Arc Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Evaluation of Benefit on Target Coverage and Sparing of Organs at Risk"
<p>This record contains raw data related to article "Adaptive Volumetric-Modulated Arc Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Evaluation of Benefit on Target Coverage and Sparing of Organs at Risk"</p><p><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Radiotherapy is essential in the management of head-neck cancer. During the course of radiotherapy, patients may develop significant anatomical changes. Re-planning with adaptive radiotherapy may ensure adequate dose coverage and sparing of organs at risk. We investigated the consequences of adaptive radiotherapy on head-neck cancer patients treated with volumetric-modulated arc radiation therapy compared to simulated non-adaptive plans: Materials and methods: We included in this retrospective dosimetric analysis 56 patients treated with adaptive radiotherapy. The primary aim of the study was to analyze the dosimetric differences with and without an adaptive approach for targets and organs at risk, particularly the spinal cord, parotid glands, oral cavity and larynx. The original plan (OPLAN) was compared to the adaptive plan (APLAN) and to a simulated non-adaptive dosimetric plan (DPLAN).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The non-adaptive DPLAN, when compared to OPLAN, showed an increased dose to all organs at risk. Spinal cord D2 increased from 27.91 (21.06-31.76) Gy to 31.39 (27.66-38.79) Gy (<i>p</i> = 0.00). V15, V30 and V45 of the DPLAN vs. the OPLAN increased by 20.6% (<i>p</i> = 0.00), 14.78% (<i>p</i> = 0.00) and 15.55% (<i>p</i> = 0.00) for right parotid; and 16.25% (<i>p</i> = 0.00), 18.7% (<i>p</i> = 0.00) and 20.19% (<i>p</i> = 0.00) for left parotid. A difference of 36.95% was observed in the oral cavity V40 (<i>p</i> = 0.00). Dose coverage was significantly reduced for both CTV (97.90% vs. 99.96%; <i>p</i> = 0.00) and PTV (94.70% vs. 98.72%; <i>p</i> = 0.00). The APLAN compared to the OPLAN had similar values for all organs at risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adaptive strategy with re-planning is able to avoid an increase in dose to organs at risk and better target coverage in head-neck cancer patients, with potential benefits in terms of side effects and disease control.</p>
Dataset for the Study: Performance evaluation of a novel solar desalination system under continuous operation for freshwater recovery
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
OFA evaluation datasets
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Dataset related to article "The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial."
<p>This record contains data related to article "The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial."</p> <p>Background: There is extreme heterogeneity in the available literature on the determination of R1 resection rate after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD); consequently, its prognostic role is still debated. The aims of this multicenter randomized study were: to evaluate the effect of sampling and clearance definition in determining R1 rate after PD for periampullary cancer; to assess the prognostic role of R1 resection.</p> <p>Methods: PD specimens were randomized to Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) (group A) or conventional method adopted before the study (group B). R1 rate was determined adopting 0 and 1 mm clearance; the association between R1, local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS) was also evaluated.</p> <p>Results. One-hundred-sixty-eight PD specimens were included. With 0 mm clearance, R1 rate was 26.2% and 20.2% for groups A and B, respectively; with 1 mm, R1 rate was 60.7% and 57.1%, respectively (p > 0.05). Only in group A, R1 was found to be a significant prognostic factor: at 0 mm, median OS was 36 and 20 months for R0 and R1, respectively, while at 1 mm. median OS was not reached and 30 months. At multivariate analysis, R1 resection was found as a significant prognostic factor independent of clearance definition only in case of adoption of LEEPP.</p> <p>Conclusions. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining R1 rate after PD. However, the pathological method is crucial to accurately evaluate its prognostic role: only R1 resections obtained with the adoption of LEEPP seem to significantly affect prognosis.</p>
Dataset related to article "Phase II trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy on adrenal gland metastases: evaluation of efficacy and impact on hormonal production "
<p>This record contains raw data related to article "Phase II trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy on adrenal gland metastases: evaluation of efficacy and impact on hormonal production"</p> <p><strong>Purpose: </strong> The purpose of this study was to assess prospectively the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for adrenal gland metastasis, with a focus on the assessment of the irradiated subjects' endocrinological function.</p> <p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong> A total of 36 patients were enrolled from 2017 to 2020 in this prospective phase II trial. Patients were treated with Linac-based SBRT, with a dose of 45 Gy in 3 consecutive fractions. Primary end-point was local control (LC) of the treated lesions and secondary end-points included evaluation of acute and late toxicity, progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and the impact on the hormonal production of adrenal glands.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong> With a median follow-up of 9.5 months, LC rates at 1 and 2 years were 94.7% and 88.4%, respectively. Rates of PFS at 1 and 2 years were 50.5% and 29.8%, with a median PFS of 14.7 months. Rates of OS at 1 and 2 years were 62.9% and 44.1%. At univariate analysis, oligorecurrence was associated with better OS compared to oligoprogressive or synchronous metastatic disease. No grade 3 or greater toxicities were registered and only a minority of patients (22.2%) reported mild treatment-related side effects. Hormonal and electrolytes production was assessed before and after treatment, showing only a slight and transient variation within the reference ranges.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> SBRT on adrenal metastases has been confirmed to be a feasible and effective treatment. With an excellent disease control and the preservation of the endocrine function, SBRT with ablative dose can be considered a viable alternative to more invasive approaches.</p>
Model Code and Various Datasets for Evaluation
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.