ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Auto-segmentation for total marrow irradiation.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incorporating Intensity Modulated Total Body Irradiation (IMRT-TBI) Into Future Cooperative Group Clinical Trials: An NRG Hematologic Malignancies Working Group-Led Report From the National Clinical Trials Network.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2026Article
- AI in Radiation Oncology: A Comprehensive Review of Current Applications and Future Directions.Cureus · 2025Review
- Can Deep Learning-Based Auto-Contouring Software Achieve Accurate Pelvic Volume Delineation in Volumetric Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer? A Preliminary Multicentric Analysis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Reducing the workload of medical diagnosis through artificial intelligence: A narrative review.Medicine · 2025Review
- Automated contouring, treatment planning, and quality assurance for total marrow lymphoid irradiation.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Vendor-Pretrained and Custom-Trained Deep Learning Segmentation Models for Head-and-Neck, Breast, and Prostate Cancers.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- NRG Oncology Assessment of Artificial Intelligence Deep Learning-Based Auto-segmentation for Radiation Therapy: Current Developments, Clinical Considerations, and Future Directions.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Article
- Deep learning and atlas-based models to streamline the segmentation workflow of total marrow and lymphoid irradiation.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- A Preliminary Study on the Auto-Segmentation of Targets and Organs at Risk in Pediatric Total Marrow and Lymphoid Irradiation.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Comparison of Deep Learning-Based Auto-Segmentation Results on Daily Kilovoltage, Megavoltage, and Cone Beam CT Images in Image-Guided Radiotherapy.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of Artificial-Intelligence (AI) segmentation in Total Marrow Irradiation (TMI) including contours throughout the head and neck (H&N), thorax, abdomen, and pelvis. Methods: An AI segmentation software was clinically introduced for total body contouring in TMI including 27 organs at risk (OARs) and 4 planning target volumes (PTVs). This work compares the clinically utilized contours to the AI-TMI contours for 21 patients. Structure and image dicom data was used to generate comparisons including volumetric, spatial, and dosimetric variations between the AI- and human-edited contour sets. Conventional volume and surface measures including the Sørensen-Dice coefficient (Dice) and the 95 Results: A total of 467 contours were compared in the 21 patients. In PTVs, contour surfaces deviated by >1mm in 38.6% ± 23.1% of structures, an average efficiency gain of 61.4%. Deviations >5mm were detected in 12.0% ± 21.3% of the PTV contours. In OARs, deviations >1mm were detected in 24.4% ± 27.1% of the structure surfaces and >5mm in 7.2% ± 18.0%; an average clinical efficiency gain of 75.6%. In H&N OARs, efficiency gains ranged from 42% in optic chiasm to 100% in eyes (unedited in all cases). In thorax, average efficiency gains were >80% in spinal cord, heart, and both lungs. Efficiency gains ranged from 60-70% in spleen, stomach, rectum, and bowel and 75-84% in liver, kidney, and bladder. DVH differences exceeded 0.05 in 109/467 curves at any dose level. The most common 5%-DVH variations were in esophagus (86%), rectum (48%), and PTVs (22%). Conclusions: AI auto-segmentation software offers a powerful solution for enhanced efficiency in TMI treatment planning. Whole body segmentation including PTVs and normal organs was successful based on spatial and dosimetric comparison.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.