ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Deep-learning-driven dose prediction and verification for stereotactic radiosurgical treatment of isolated brain metastases.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating artificial intelligence with Gamma Knife radiosurgery in treating meningiomas and schwannomas: a review.Neurosurgical review · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in radiation therapy: from imaging to delivery-a comprehensive review.BJR artificial intelligence · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: While deep learning has shown promise for automated radiotherapy planning, its application to the specific scenario of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases using fixed-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) on a linear accelerator remains limited. This work aimed to develop and verify a deep learning-guided automated planning protocol tailored for this scenario. Methods: We collected 70 SRS plans for solitary brain metastases, of which 36 cases were for training and 34 for testing. Test cases were derived from two distinct clinical institutions. The envisioned automated planning process comprised (1): clinical dose prediction facilitated by deep-learning algorithms (2); transformation of the forecasted dose into executable plans via voxel-centric dose emulation (3); validation of the envisaged plan employing a precise dosimeter in conjunction with a linear accelerator. Dose prediction paradigms were established by engineering and refining two three-dimensional UNet architectures (UNet and AttUNet). Input parameters encompassed computed tomography scans from clinical plans and demarcations of the focal point alongside organs at potential risk (OARs); the ensuing output manifested as a 3D dose matrix tailored for each case under scrutiny. Results: Dose estimations rendered by both models mirrored the manual plans and adhered to clinical stipulations. As projected by the dual models, the apex and average doses for OARs did not deviate appreciably from those delineated in the manual plan (P-value≥0.05). AttUNet showed promising results compared to the foundational UNet. Predicted doses showcased a pronounced dose gradient, with peak concentrations localized within the target vicinity. The executable plans conformed to clinical dosimetric benchmarks and aligned with their associated verification assessments (100% gamma approval rate at 3 mm/3%). Conclusion: This study demonstrates an automated planning technique for fixed-field IMRT-based SRS for brain metastases. The envisaged plans met clinical requirements, were reproducible across centers, and achievable in deliveries. This represents progress toward automated paradigms for this specific scenario.
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.