ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2023
Integrating plan complexity and dosiomics features with deep learning in patient-specific quality assurance for volumetric modulated arc therapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of patient-specific quality assurance for volumetric modulated arc therapy using machine log files.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Comparative dosimetric evaluation of independent verification systems: ArcherQA versus AccuCheck for volumetric modulated Arc therapy plan validation.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Assessment of rotational dose perturbations in SBRT: A radiomic-dosiomic predictive model based on the structural similarity index measure.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Predicting patient-specific quality assurance outcomes in helical tomotherapy using plan complexity and 3D dose-distribution radiomics.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A Balanced Multimodal Multi-Task Deep Learning Framework for Robust Patient-Specific Quality Assurance.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Time-Series Approach for Machine Learning-Based Patient-Specific Quality Assurance of Radiosurgery Plans.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A feasibility study of deep learning prediction model for VMAT patient-specific QA.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- The impact of plan complexity on calculation and measurement-based pre-treatment verifications for sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the feasibility and performance of deep learning (DL) models combined with plan complexity (PC) and dosiomics features in the patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) for patients underwent volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).
methodsTotal of 201 VMAT plans with measured PSQA results were retrospectively enrolled and divided into training and testing sets randomly at 7:3. PC metrics were calculated using house-built algorithm based on Matlab. Dosiomics features were extracted and selected using Random Forest (RF) from planning target volume (PTV) and overlap regions with 3D dose distributions. The top 50 dosiomics and 5 PC features were selected based on feature importance screening. A DL DenseNet was adapted and trained for the PSQA prediction.
resultsThe measured average gamma passing rate (GPR) of these VMAT plans was 97.94% ± 1.87%, 94.33% ± 3.22%, and 87.27% ± 4.81% at the criteria of 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm, respectively. Models with PC features alone demonstrated the lowest area under curve (AUC). The AUC and sensitivity of PC and dosiomics (D) combined model at 2%/2 mm were 0.915 and 0.833, respectively. The AUCs of DL models were improved from 0.943, 0.849, 0.841 to 0.948, 0.890, 0.942 in the combined models (PC + D + DL) at 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm and 2%/2 mm, respectively. A best AUC of 0.942 with a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 100%, 81.8%, and 83.6% was achieved with combined model (PC + D + DL) at 2%/2 mm.
conclusionsIntegrating DL with dosiomics and PC metrics is promising in the prediction of GPRs in PSQA for patients underwent VMAT.
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.