S. van Beek
Netherlands Cancer Institute
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by S. van Beek.
Medical Physics | 2012
A. Mencarelli; S. van Beek; S. van Kranen; C. Rasch; M. van Herk; J.J. Sonke
PURPOSE Deformable image registration (DIR) is often validated based on a distance-to-agreement (DTA) criterion of automatically propagated anatomical landmarks that were manually identified. Due to human observer variability, however, the performance of the registration method is diluted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an analysis of variance (ANOVA) based validation to account for such observer variation. METHODS Weekly cone beam CTs (CBCTs) of ten head and neck cancer patients undergoing five weeks of radiotherapy were used. An expert identified 23 anatomical features (landmarks) on the planning CT. The landmarks were automatically propagated to the CBCT using multiregion-of-interest (mROI) registration. Additionally, two human observers independently localized these landmarks on the CBCTs. Subsequently, ANOVA was used to compute the variance of each observer on the pairwise distance (PWD). RESULTS ANOVA based analysis demonstrated that a classical DTA approach underestimated the precision for the mROI due to human observer variation by about 25%. The systematic error (accuracy) of mROI ranged from 0.13 to 0.17 mm; the variability (1 SD) (precision) ranged from 1.3 to 1.5 mm demonstrating that its performance is dominated by the precision. CONCLUSIONS The PWD-ANOVA method accounts for human observer variation allowing a better estimation of the of DIR errors.
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2016
S. van Beek; L. Hartgring; Anja Betgen; J. Stam; M. Buijs; B. Van Triest; P. Remeijer
S223 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ nearest whole number. The median DVH value of new genitalia contours denotes the optimal constraint and the 75th centile denotes the mandatory constraint. Horizontal lines represent current genitalia dose constraints. It can be observed that new recommended dose constraints contrast the current dose constraints highlighting the need for gender and tumour stage specific genitalia dose constraints.
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics | 2007
M. van Zwienen; S. van Beek; J. Belderbos; S. van Kranen; C. Rasch; M. van Herk; J.J. Sonke
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics | 2009
S. van Kranen; A. Mencarelli; S. van Beek; C. Rasch; J.J. Sonke; M. van Herk
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2016
L. Hartgring; Jasper Nijkamp; S. van Kranen; S. van Beek; B. Van Triest; P. Remeijer
Physics in Medicine and Biology | 2014
A. Mencarelli; S. van Beek; Lambert Zijp; C. Rasch; M. van Herk; J.J. Sonke
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2018
S. van Beek; S. Gerrets; S. Nakhaee; B. Van Triest; P. Remeijer
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2018
Marlies E. Nowee; C. Beekman; Anja Betgen; S. van Beek; J.J. Sonke; U. Van der Heide; B. Van Triest; P. Remeijer
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2018
R. Haas; S. van Beek; Anja Betgen; S. Ali; C. Schneider; F. Heres Diddens; A. Scholten; P. Remeijer
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2017
S. van Beek; O. Hamming-Vrieze; A. Al Mamgani; A. Navran; J. Van de Kamer; P. Remeijer