Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37405256›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Machine Learning for Predicting Clinician Evaluation of Treatment Plans for Left-Sided Whole Breast Radiation Therapy.

Christian Fiandra, Federica Cattani, Maria Cristina Leonardi, Stefania Comi, Stefania Zara, Linda Rossi, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Piero Fariselli, Umberto Ricardi, Ben Heijmen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Christian FiandraDepartment of Oncology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Federica CattaniUnit of Medical Physics, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Maria Cristina LeonardiDivision of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Stefania ComiUnit of Medical Physics, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Stefania ZaraR&D Department, Tecnologie Avanzate, Turin, Italy.
Linda RossiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-FossaDivision of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Piero FariselliDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, Turin, Italy.
Umberto RicardiDepartment of Oncology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Ben HeijmenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this work was to investigate the ability of machine learning models to use treatment plan dosimetry for prediction of clinician approval of treatment plans (no further planning needed) for left-sided whole breast radiation therapy with boost. Methods and Materials: Investigated plans were generated to deliver a dose of 40.05 Gy to the whole breast in 15 fractions over 3 weeks, with the tumor bed simultaneously boosted to 48 Gy. In addition to the manually generated clinical plan of each of the 120 patients from a single institution, an automatically generated plan was included for each patient to enhance the number of study plans to 240. In random order, the treating clinician retrospectively scored all 240 plans as (1) approved without further planning to seek improvement or (2) further planning needed, while being blind for type of plan generation (manual or automated). In total, 2 × 5 classifiers were trained and evaluated for ability to correctly predict the clinician's plan evaluations: random forest (RF) and constrained logistic regression (LR) classifiers, each trained for 5 different sets of dosimetric plan parameters (feature sets [FS]). Importances of included features for predictions were investigated to better understand clinicians' choices. Results: Although all 240 plans were in principle clinically acceptable for the clinician, only for 71.5% was no further planning required. For the most extensive FS, accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and Cohen's κ for generated RF/LR models for prediction of approval without further planning were 87.2 ± 2.0/86.7 ± 2.2, 0.80 ± 0.03/0.86 ± 0.02, and 0.63 ± 0.05/0.69 ± 0.04, respectively. In contrast to LR, RF performance was independent of the applied FS. For both RF and LR, whole breast excluding boost PTV (PTV Conclusions: The investigated use of machine learning to predict clinician approval of treatment plans is highly promising. Including nondosimetric parameters could further increase classifiers' performances. The tool could become useful for aiding treatment planners in generating plans with a high probability of being directly approved by the treating clinician.

Identifiers

PMID37405256
PMCPMC10316432

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.