ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Deep learning for automatic head and neck lymph node level delineation provides expert-level accuracy.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of MRI-based nnU-Net model for automated segmentation of neck lymph nodes in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter study.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a quasi-automatic treatment planning workflow for head-and-neck cancer in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Annotation-efficient deep learning detection and measurement of mediastinal lymph nodes in CT.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Assessing the robustness and clinical evaluation of a deep-learning segmentation model for head and neck cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Modified EfficientNet-B0 Architecture Optimized with Quantum-Behaved Algorithm for Skin Cancer Lesion Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Generative Inpainting-Based Anomaly Detection for CT Liver Tumor Detection.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2025Article
- Real-world performance evaluation of commercial autocontouring software for head and neck cancer radiotherapy.The British journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Advancing offline magnetic resonance-guided prostate radiotherapy through dedicated imaging and deep learning-based automatic contouring of targets and neurovascular structures.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Principles of artificial intelligence in radiooncology.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Review
- Benchmarking GPT-5 in radiation oncology: measurable gains, but persistent need for expert oversight.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- A multicenter dataset for lymph node clinical target volume delineation of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Evolving Horizons in Radiation Therapy Auto-Contouring: Distilling Insights, Embracing Data-Centric Frameworks, and Moving Beyond Geometric Quantification.Advances in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Review of Deep Learning Based Autosegmentation for Clinical Target Volume: Current Status and Future Directions.Advances in radiation oncology · 2024Review
- Article
- Fine-tuning a local LLaMA-3 large language model for automated privacy-preserving physician letter generation in radiation oncology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Clinical validation of commercial deep-learning based auto-segmentation models for organs at risk in the head and neck region: a single institution study.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Clinical acceptability of automatically generated lymph node levels and structures of deglutition and mastication for head and neck radiation therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Automated contouring and statistical process control for plan quality in a breast clinical trial.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Deep learning-based head and neck lymph node level (HN_LNL) autodelineation is of high relevance to radiotherapy research and clinical treatment planning but still underinvestigated in academic literature. In particular, there is no publicly available open-source solution for large-scale autosegmentation of HN_LNL in the research setting. Methods: An expert-delineated cohort of 35 planning CTs was used for training of an nnU-net 3D-fullres/2D-ensemble model for autosegmentation of 20 different HN_LNL. A second cohort acquired at the same institution later in time served as the test set (n = 20). In a completely blinded evaluation, 3 clinical experts rated the quality of deep learning autosegmentations in a head-to-head comparison with expert-created contours. For a subgroup of 10 cases, intraobserver variability was compared to the average deep learning autosegmentation accuracy on the original and recontoured set of expert segmentations. A postprocessing step to adjust craniocaudal boundaries of level autosegmentations to the CT slice plane was introduced and the effect of autocontour consistency with CT slice plane orientation on geometric accuracy and expert rating was investigated. Results: Blinded expert ratings for deep learning segmentations and expert-created contours were not significantly different. Deep learning segmentations with slice plane adjustment were rated numerically higher (mean, 81.0 vs. 79.6, p = 0.185) and deep learning segmentations without slice plane adjustment were rated numerically lower (77.2 vs. 79.6, p = 0.167) than manually drawn contours. In a head-to-head comparison, deep learning segmentations with CT slice plane adjustment were rated significantly better than deep learning contours without slice plane adjustment (81.0 vs. 77.2, p = 0.004). Geometric accuracy of deep learning segmentations was not different from intraobserver variability (mean Dice per level, 0.76 vs. 0.77, p = 0.307). Clinical significance of contour consistency with CT slice plane orientation was not represented by geometric accuracy metrics (volumetric Dice, 0.78 vs. 0.78, p = 0.703). Conclusions: We show that a nnU-net 3D-fullres/2D-ensemble model can be used for highly accurate autodelineation of HN_LNL using only a limited training dataset that is ideally suited for large-scale standardized autodelineation of HN_LNL in the research setting. Geometric accuracy metrics are only an imperfect surrogate for blinded expert rating.
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.