Technical feasibility

PART B: VALORISATION PLAN

SECTION I: Testing

 

1

Has the R & D result been tested?

YES

X

NO

 

 

The following question is replied according to the reply in question 1

 

If yes

 

1a

In what mode has the result been tested?

•             Prototype

•             Pilot Application

•             Alpha/BETA testing

 

miCRO serves as a tool for radiation oncologists and medical physicists in taking clinical decisions regarding hypo-fractionated and accelerated regimens, compensation for interruptions of treatment, and evaluation of doses from sum of plans.

The program can be considered as tested at a level comparable with the beta. In fact, the complete functionality has been developed and the software is currently in use in the institution.

 

 

 

1b. Please describe and discuss the testing results
The test have been conducted against results found in literature, spreadsheets and, to some extent,  by the comparison with the results provided by a freely usable tool available on the web. The CRO’s program covers some issues that are not covered by the mentioned tool. In fact, it manages the change of the number of fractions or unpredicted interruptions/delays in planned treatments, it provides a database of radio-biological parameters according to selected tumor or organ at risk, and speeds up reporting of the calculated dose providing also literature references. That extra features  were tested by comparison with pseudo-manual calculation and results available in literature. The software has been positively tested in the laboratory and on the field (internally to the institution).

 

If no:

 

1c

Describe what type of testing does the R&D result need?
N/A

 

 

 

1d. What is the time needed for testing?
N/A
1e. What is the cost needed for testing?
N/A

 

 

SECTION 2: Current Stage of Development

 

2a

To what extent does the development team have technical resources for supporting the production of a new product? (Researchers, human resources, hardware, etc. )
The tool is, at the moment, implemented as a standalone software based on Matlab. Changing the methods of use of the software may need some technical effort that will be provided by third parties, if needed. An example may be represented by the porting to Java language which is multi-platform and then easier to deploy.

There are several technical options that may be followed: stand-alone software with one shot license, stand-alone software with annual fee, web based software.

To allow the deployment to other institutions, the team should include some technical and sales support resources.

At the moment, there are no human resources to apply to the mentioned tasks.

 

 

 

2b

What are the technical issues that need to be tackled for full deployment, if needed?
Some technical issues to be taken into account are related to the deployment and business model that has not been defined yet. In fact, provided the current stage of development, there is the need of porting the software to a easily deployable solution (e.g multi platform standalone or web based).

 

 

2c

What additional technical resources are needed for the production of this new product?
A possibility to be explored is represented by integrating the program as an additional module to an existing commercial or non-commercial Radiation Treatment Planning System (RTPS). Since some of the functions of the software are not currently implemented in RTPSs, it could be worth spending some effort to make the research result usable for such third parties. Another option is a partnership with companies providing radiotherapy systems. They usually provide also an RTPS that may be expanded by a co-operation with the proponent institution.

 

2d

Overall assessment of the current stage of technical development.
The technical development is currently at an advanced stage. Some platform adaptions and minor modification may be necessary to finalize the deployment.

 

SECTION 3: Deployment

3a

Define the demands for large scale production in terms of
  • Materials
Negligible.

 

 

  • technologies, tools, machineries
Software, web servers.

 

 

 

  • Staff effort
The current version of the software doesn’t require relevant activities.

About the porting of the program to platforms different from the current, it can be stated that a 3 man months effort is necessary for each extra platform.

The deployment requires some technical sales activities in the order of 1 man month for  the start-up and an effort depending on the diffusion of the software apriori not predictable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SECTION 4: Overall Assessment

 

1

What is you overall assessment of the technical feasibility of the research result?
The remaining activities are not critical. If needed, the porting to extra platforms will be made by the use of commercially or freely available tools and by the support of external human resources. The level of confidence about feasibility is considered very good.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KEYWORDS QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT (0-5).

 

Please put X as appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5
Adequacy of testing activity undertaken so far         X
Adequacy and availability of technical resources of the development team     X    
Current development stage         X
Overall technical feasibility         X

 

 

 

Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Request a proposal

Valorisation Plan Authors

Related Documents

There in no related documents

Visit the other applications of the INTERVALUE Platform: R&D Repository | IP Agreements

© 2009-2010 INTERVALUE Project