Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30963580›Full record

ReviewMedical physics2019

Knowledge-based planning for intensity-modulated radiation therapy: A review of data-driven approaches.

Yaorong Ge, Q Jackie Wu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

120 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yaorong GeDepartment of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, 28223, USA.
Q Jackie WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.

Funding

Developing knowledge models to enable rapid learning in radiation therapyR01CA201212 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI GE, YAORONG, WU, QINGRONG JACKIE · 2016 to 2019
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA201212NIH/NCI R01CA201212
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIntensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), including its variations (including IMRT, Volumetric Arc Therapy (VMAT), and Tomotherapy), is a widely used and critically important technology for cancer treatment. It is a knowledge-intensive technology due not only to its own technical complexity, but also to the inherently conflicting nature of maximizing tumor control while minimizing normal organ damage. As IMRT experience and especially the carefully designed clinical plan data are accumulated during the past two decades, a new set of methods commonly termed knowledge-based planning (KBP) have been developed that aim to improve the quality and efficiency of IMRT planning by learning from the database of past clinical plans. Some of this development has led to commercial products recently that allowed the investigation of KBP in numerous clinical applications. In this literature review, we will attempt to present a summary of published methods of knowledge-based approaches in IMRT and recent clinical validation results.

methodsIn March 2018, a literature search was conducted in the NIH Medline database using the PubMed interface to identify publications that describe methods and validations related to KBP in IMRT including variations such as VMAT and Tomotherapy. The search criteria were designed to have a broad scope to capture relevant results with high sensitivity. The authors filtered down the search results according to a predefined selection criteria by reviewing the titles and abstracts first and then by reviewing the full text. A few papers were added to the list based on the references of the reviewed papers. The final set of papers was reviewed and summarized here.

resultsThe initial search yielded a total of 740 articles. A careful review of the titles, abstracts, and eventually the full text and then adding relevant articles from reviewing the references resulted in a final list of 73 articles published between 2011 and early 2018. These articles described methods for developing knowledge models for predicting such parameters as dosimetric and dose-volume points, voxel-level doses, and objective function weights that improve or automate IMRT planning for various cancer sites, addressing different clinical and quality assurance needs, and using a variety of machine learning approaches. A number of articles reported carefully designed clinical studies that assessed the performance of KBP models in realistic clinical applications. Overwhelming majority of the studies demonstrated the benefits of KBP in achieving comparable and often improved quality of IMRT planning while reducing planning time and plan quality variation.

conclusionsThe number of KBP-related studies has been steadily increasing since 2011 indicating a growing interest in applying this approach to clinical applications. Validation studies have generally shown KBP to produce plans with quality comparable to expert planners while reducing the time and efforts to generate plans. However, current studies are mostly retrospective and leverage relatively small datasets. Larger datasets collected through multi-institutional collaboration will enable the development of more advanced models to further improve the performance of KBP in complex clinical cases. Prospective studies will be an important next step toward widespread adoption of this exciting technology.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedHumansMachine LearningRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedIMRTIMRT planningintensity-modulated radiation therapyKBPknowledge-based planningknowledge modelingmachine learningtomotherapyVMAT

Identifiers

PMID30963580
PMCPMC6561807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.