Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34869010›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Machine Learning for Head and Neck Cancer: A Safe Bet?-A Clinically Oriented Systematic Review for the Radiation Oncologist.

Stefania Volpe, Matteo Pepa, Mattia Zaffaroni, Federica Bellerba, Riccardo Santamaria, Giulia Marvaso, Lars Johannes Isaksson, Sara Gandini, Anna Starzyńska, Maria Cristina Leonardi and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. External validation of anEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Stefania VolpeDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Matteo PepaDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Mattia ZaffaroniDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Federica BellerbaMolecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Riccardo SantamariaDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Giulia MarvasoDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Lars Johannes IsakssonDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Sara GandiniMolecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Anna StarzyńskaDepartment of Oral Surgery, Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland.
Maria Cristina LeonardiDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Roberto OrecchiaScientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Daniela AlterioDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-FossaDivision of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Milan, Italy.
European Institute of Oncology · ITIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITUniversity of Milan · ITGdańsk Medical University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeMachine learning (ML) is emerging as a feasible approach to optimize patients' care path in Radiation Oncology. Applications include autosegmentation, treatment planning optimization, and prediction of oncological and toxicity outcomes. The purpose of this clinically oriented systematic review is to illustrate the potential and limitations of the most commonly used ML models in solving everyday clinical issues in head and neck cancer (HNC) radiotherapy (RT). MATERIALS AND

methodsElectronic databases were screened up to May 2021. Studies dealing with ML and radiomics were considered eligible. The quality of the included studies was rated by an adapted version of the qualitative checklist originally developed by Luo et al. All statistical analyses were performed using R version 3.6.1.

resultsForty-eight studies (21 on autosegmentation, four on treatment planning, 12 on oncological outcome prediction, 10 on toxicity prediction, and one on determinants of postoperative RT) were included in the analysis. The most common imaging modality was computed tomography (CT) (40%) followed by magnetic resonance (MR) (10%). Quantitative image features were considered in nine studies (19%). No significant differences were identified in global and methodological scores when works were stratified per their task (i.e., autosegmentation). DISCUSSION AND

conclusionThe range of possible applications of ML in the field of HN Radiation Oncology is wide, albeit this area of research is relatively young. Overall, if not safe yet, ML is most probably a bet worth making.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencehead and neck cancermachine learningradiotherapysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34869010
PMCPMC8637856
OpenAlexW3212712419

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.