Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33068690›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2021

Generating High-Quality Lymph Node Clinical Target Volumes for Head and Neck Cancer Radiation Therapy Using a Fully Automated Deep Learning-Based Approach.

Carlos E Cardenas, Beth M Beadle, Adam S Garden, Heath D Skinner, Jinzhong Yang, Dong Joo Rhee, Rachel E McCarroll, Tucker J Netherton, Skylar S Gay, Lifei Zhang and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Enhancing Radiation Oncology Education Through Artificial Intelligence: A Review of Applications, Limitations, and Future Directions.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Deep learning for autosegmentation for radiotherapy treatment planning: State-of-the-art and novel perspectives.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

11 authors.

Carlos E CardenasDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: cecardenas@mdanderson.org.
Beth M BeadleDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Adam S GardenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Heath D SkinnerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Jinzhong YangDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Dong Joo RheeDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Rachel E McCarrollDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical System, Baltimore, Maryland.
Tucker J NethertonDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Skylar S GayDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Lifei ZhangDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Laurence E CourtDepartment of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.

Funding

The Radiation Planning Assistant (RPA) for Radiation Therapy Planning in Low- and Middle-Income CountriesUH3CA202665 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI BEADLE, BETH M, COURT, LAURENCE E · 2018 to 2020
$2.3M
The Radiation Planning Assistant (RPA) for Radiation Therapy Planning in Low- and Middle-Income CountriesUH2CA202665 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI BEADLE, BETH M, COURT, LAURENCE E · 2016 to 2017
$953k
NCI NIH HHS L30 CA242657NCI NIH HHS UH2 CA202665NCI NIH HHS UH3 CA202665
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop a deep learning model that generates consistent, high-quality lymph node clinical target volumes (CTV) contours for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, as an integral part of a fully automated radiation treatment planning workflow. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Computed tomography (CT) scans from 71 HNC patients were retrospectively collected and split into training (n = 51), cross-validation (n = 10), and test (n = 10) data sets. All had target volume delineations covering lymph node levels Ia through V (Ia-V), Ib through V (Ib-V), II through IV (II-IV), and retropharyngeal (RP) nodes, which were previously approved by a radiation oncologist specializing in HNC. Volumes of interest (VOIs) about nodal levels were automatically identified using computer vision techniques. The VOI (cropped CT image) and approved contours were used to train a U-Net autosegmentation model. Each lymph node level was trained independently, with model parameters optimized by assessing performance on the cross-validation data set. Once optimal model parameters were identified, overlap and distance metrics were calculated between ground truth and autosegmentations on the test set. Lastly, this final model was used on 32 additional patient scans (not included in original 71 cases) and autosegmentations visually rated by 3 radiation oncologists as being "clinically acceptable without requiring edits," "requiring minor edits," or "requiring major edits."

resultsWhen comparing ground truths to autosegmentations on the test data set, median Dice Similarity Coefficients were 0.90, 0.90, 0.89, and 0.81, and median mean surface distance values were 1.0 mm, 1.0 mm, 1.1 mm, and 1.3 mm for node levels Ia-V, Ib-V, II-IV, and RP nodes, respectively. Qualitative scoring varied among physicians. Overall, 99% of autosegmented target volumes were either scored as being clinically acceptable or requiring minor edits (ie, stylistic recommendations, <2 minutes).

conclusionsWe developed a fully automated artificial intelligence approach to autodelineate nodal CTVs for patients with intact HNC. Most autosegmentations were found to be clinically acceptable after qualitative review when considering recommended stylistic edits. This promising work automatically delineates nodal CTVs in a robust and consistent manner; this approach can be implemented in ongoing efforts for fully automated radiation treatment planning.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedDeep LearningHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansLymph NodesPharynxRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID33068690
PMCPMC9472456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.