ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
A multi-centric evaluation of self-learning GAN based pseudo-CT generation software for low field pelvic magnetic resonance imaging.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Image-based evaluation of a commercial AI synthetic CT generator for brain and prostate MR-only radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- A Dosimetric Comparison of the Accumulated Dose in Prostate SBRT for Non-Adaptive and Adaptive External Beam Radiotherapy.Cancers · 2026Article
- Self-learning GAN based synthetic CT generation: unlocking CBCT-based adaptive radiotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Brain MR-only workflow in clinical practice: A comparison among generators for quality assurance and patient positioning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Results of 2023 survey on the use of synthetic computed tomography for magnetic resonance Imaging-only radiotherapy: Current status and future steps.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
24 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose/objectives: An artificial intelligence-based pseudo-CT from low-field MR images is proposed and clinically evaluated to unlock the full potential of MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy for pelvic cancer care. Materials and method: In collaboration with TheraPanacea (TheraPanacea, Paris, France) a pseudo-CT AI-model was generated using end-to-end ensembled self-supervised GANs endowed with cycle consistency using data from 350 pairs of weakly aligned data of pelvis planning CTs and TrueFisp-(0.35T)MRIs. The image accuracy of the generated pCT were evaluated using a retrospective cohort involving 20 test cases coming from eight different institutions (US: 2, EU: 5, AS: 1) and different CT vendors. Reconstruction performance was assessed using the organs at risk used for treatment. Concerning the dosimetric evaluation, twenty-nine prostate cancer patients treated on the low field MR-Linac (ViewRay) at Montpellier Cancer Institute were selected. Planning CTs were non-rigidly registered to the MRIs for each patient. Treatment plans were optimized on the planning CT with a clinical TPS fulfilling all clinical criteria and recalculated on the warped CT (wCT) and the pCT. Three different algorithms were used: AAA, AcurosXB and MonteCarlo. Dose distributions were compared using the global gamma passing rates and dose metrics. Results: The observed average scaled (between maximum and minimum HU values of the CT) difference between the pCT and the planning CT was 33.20 with significant discrepancies across organs. Femoral heads were the most reliably reconstructed (4.51 and 4.77) while anal canal and rectum were the less precise ones (63.08 and 53.13). Mean gamma passing rates for 1%1mm, 2%/2mm, and 3%/3mm tolerance criteria and 10% threshold were greater than 96%, 99% and 99%, respectively, regardless the algorithm used. Dose metrics analysis showed a good agreement between the pCT and the wCT. The mean relative difference were within 1% for the target volumes (CTV and PTV) and 2% for the OARs. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the feasibility of generating clinically acceptable an artificial intelligence-based pseudo CT for low field MR in pelvis with consistent image accuracy and dosimetric results.
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.