ArticleMedical physics2023
Single patient learning for adaptive radiotherapy dose prediction.
Article in Medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- End-to-end deep learning pipeline for automated IMRT planning in lymphoma: Feasibility and limitations.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Optimal radiotherapy dose scheduling with variable fraction sizes and breaks via sequential mixed-integer convex programming.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence applications in adaptive radiotherapy-a narrative review.Translational cancer research · 2026Review
- Adaptive radiotherapy dose prediction on head and neck cancer patients with a 3D multi-headed U-Net deep learning architecture.Machine Learning. Health · 2025Article
- Longitudinal evaluation of workflow optimization in radiotherapy: A 4-year retrospective study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Using a patient-specific diffusion model to generate CBCT-based synthetic CTs for CBCT-guided adaptive radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2025Article
- The InterVision Framework: An Enhanced Fine-Tuning Deep Learning Strategy for Auto-Segmentation in Head and Neck.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThroughout a patient's course of radiation therapy, maintaining accuracy of their initial treatment plan over time is challenging due to anatomical changes-for example, stemming from patient weight loss or tumor shrinkage. Online adaptation of their RT plan to these changes is crucial, but hindered by manual and time-consuming processes. While deep learning (DL) based solutions have shown promise in streamlining adaptive radiation therapy (ART) workflows, they often require large and extensive datasets to train population-based models. PURPOSE: This study extends our prior research by introducing a minimalist approach to patient-specific adaptive dose prediction. In contrast to our prior method, which involved fine-tuning a pre-trained population model, this new method trains a model from scratch using only a patient's initial treatment data. This patient-specific dose predictor aims to enhance clinical accessibility, thereby empowering physicians and treatment planners to make more informed, quantitative decisions in ART. We hypothesize that patient-specific DL models will provide more accurate adaptive dose predictions for their respective patients compared to a population-based DL model.
methodsWe selected 33 patients to train an adaptive population-based (AP) model. Ten additional patients were selected, and their respective initial RT data served as single samples for training patient-specific (PS) models. These 10 patients contained an additional 26 ART plans that were withheld as the test dataset to evaluate AP versus PS model dose prediction performance. We assessed model performance using Mean Absolute Percent Error (MAPE) by comparing predicted doses to the originally delivered ground truth doses. We used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to determine statistically significant differences in terms of MAPE between the AP and PS model results across the test dataset. Furthermore, we calculated differences between predicted and ground truth mean doses for segmented structures and determined statistical significance in the differences for each of them.
resultsThe average MAPE across AP and PS model dose predictions was 5.759% and 4.069%, respectively. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test yielded two-tailed p-value =
conclusionOur study demonstrates the potential of patient-specific deep learning models in application to ART. Notably, our method streamlines the training process by minimizing the size of the required training dataset, as only a single patient's initial treatment data is required. External institutions considering the implementation of such a technology could package such a model so that it only requires the upload of a reference treatment plan for model training and deployment. Our single patient learning strategy demonstrates promise in ART due to its minimal dataset requirement and its utility in personalization of cancer treatment.
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.