ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2023
Comparison of four synthetic CT generators for brain and prostate MR-only workflow in radiotherapy.
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 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of synthetic computed tomography based on a deep learning model in pelvic radiotherapy planning: A feasibility study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Image-based evaluation of a commercial AI synthetic CT generator for brain and prostate MR-only radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Phantom benchmarking for quality assurance of synthetic computed tomography in cranial magnetic resonance-only radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Dental metal artifacts in magnetic resonance-based synthetic computed tomography for brain radiotherapy: Impact on dose, patient setup, and geometric distortion.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A combined automatic organ at risk contouring and synthetic Computed Tomography solution for pelvic Magnetic Resonance-only radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Optimizing thoracic synthetic computed tomography generation from magnetic resonance imaging: the role of Fourier transform and other key factors.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Personalised medicine through AI-enhanced integration of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy.European radiology experimental · 2025Review
- Deep Learning for CT Synthesis in Radiotherapy.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluation and comparison of synthetic computed tomography algorithms with 3T MRI for prostate radiotherapy: AI-based versus bulk density method.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in the management of prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Article
- Brain MR-only workflow in clinical practice: A comparison among generators for quality assurance and patient positioning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Synthetic Computed Tomography generation using deep-learning for female pelvic radiotherapy planning.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- A deep learning algorithm to generate synthetic computed tomography images for brain treatments from 0.35 T magnetic resonance imaging.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Advancements in synthetic CT generation from MRI: A review of techniques, and trends in radiation therapy planning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Review
- Evaluating the Hounsfield unit assignment and dose differences between CT-based standard and deep learning-based synthetic CT images for MRI-only radiation therapy of the head and neck.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Feasibility of Magnetic Resonance-based Synthetic Computed Tomography for Proton Dose Calculation in Prostate Cancer.Journal of medical physicsArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe interest in MR-only workflows is growing with the introduction of artificial intelligence in the synthetic CT generators converting MR images into CT images. The aim of this study was to evaluate several commercially available sCT generators for two anatomical localizations.
methodsFour sCT generators were evaluated: one based on the bulk density method and three based on deep learning methods. The comparison was performed on large patient cohorts (brain: 42 patients and pelvis: 52 patients). It included geometric accuracy with the evaluation of Hounsfield Units (HU) mean error (ME) for several structures like the body, bones and soft tissues. Dose evaluation included metrics like the D
resultsHU ME in the body were similar to those reported in the literature. D
conclusionsAll four generators can be used in clinical practice to implement a MR-only workflow but the bulk density method clearly performed worst in the brain.
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.