Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34888195›Full record

ReviewQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2021

Artificial intelligence applications in intensity modulated radiation treatment planning: an overview.

Yang Sheng, Jiahan Zhang, Yaorong Ge, Xinyi Li, Wentao Wang, Hunter Stephens, Fang-Fang Yin, Qiuwen Wu, Q Jackie Wu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

9 authors.

Yang ShengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Jiahan ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Yaorong GeDepartment of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Xinyi LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Wentao WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Hunter StephensDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Fang-Fang YinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Qiuwen WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Q Jackie WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 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 CA201212
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to methods that improve and automate challenging human tasks by systematically capturing and applying relevant knowledge in these tasks. Over the past decades, a number of approaches have been developed to address different types and needs of system intelligence ranging from search strategies to knowledge representation and inference to robotic planning. In the context of radiation treatment planning, multiple AI approaches may be adopted to improve the planning quality and efficiency. For example, knowledge representation and inference methods may improve dose prescription by integrating and reasoning about the domain knowledge described in many clinical guidelines and clinical trials reports. In this review, we will focus on the most studied AI approach in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)-machine learning (ML) and describe our recent efforts in applying ML to improve the quality, consistency, and efficiency of IMRT/VMAT planning. With the available high-quality data, we can build models to accurately predict critical variables for each step of the planning process and thus automate and improve its outcomes. Specific to the IMRT/VMAT planning process, we can build models for each of the four critical components in the process: dose-volume histogram (DVH), Dose, Fluence, and Human Planner. These models can be divided into two general groups. The first group focuses on encoding prior experience and knowledge through ML and more recently deep learning (DL) from prior clinical plans and using these models to predict the optimal DVH (DVH prediction model), or 3D dose distribution (dose prediction model), or fluence map (fluence map model). The goal of these models is to reduce or remove the trial-and-error process and guarantee consistently high-quality plans. The second group of models focuses on mimicking human planners' decision-making process (planning strategy model) during the iterative adjustments/guidance of the optimization engine. Each critical step of the IMRT/VMAT treatment planning process can be improved and automated by AI methods. As more training data becomes available and more sophisticated models are developed, we can expect that the AI methods in treatment planning will continue to improve accuracy, efficiency, and robustness.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence (AI)radiation therapytreatment planning

Identifiers

PMID34888195
PMCPMC8611458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.