ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2023
A deep learning segmentation method to assess dose to organs at risk during breast radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimation of Detailed Cardiac Doses for Pediatric Radiation Therapy Patients in National Wilms Tumor Study.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2026Article
- A neighborhood attention transformer network for enhanced 3D segmentation of the left anterior descending artery.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Transformer-based cardiac substructure segmentation from contrast and non-contrast computed tomography for radiotherapy planning.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Advancing morphometric assessment of the aorta and left ventricle from dynamic CT: a deep learning-based study.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026Article
- RAU-Net for precise lung cancer GTV segmentation in radiation therapy planning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating deep learning auto-contouring for lung radiation therapy: A review of accuracy, variability, efficiency and dose, in target volumes and organs at risk.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Cardiac substructure delineation in radiation therapy - A state-of-the-art review.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2024Review
- Safety and efficiency of a fully automatic workflow for auto-segmentation in radiotherapy using three commercially available deep learning-based applications.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Streamlining Thoracic Radiotherapy Quality assurance: One-Class Classification for Automated OAR Contour Assessment.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Contouring of organs at risk is important for studying health effects following breast radiotherapy. However, manual contouring is time-consuming and subject to variability. The purpose of this study was to develop a deep learning-based method to automatically segment multiple structures on breast radiotherapy planning computed tomography (CT) images. Materials and methods: We used data from 118 patients, including 90 diagnostic CT scans with expert structure delineations for training and 28 breast radiotherapy planning CT images for testing. The radiotherapy CT images also had expert delineations for evaluating performance. We targeted a total of eleven organs at risk including five heart substructures. Segmentation performance was evaluated using the metrics of Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), overlap fraction, volume similarity, Hausdorff distance, mean surface distance, and dose. Results: The average DSC achieved on the radiotherapy planning images was 0.94 ± 0.02 for the whole heart, 0.96 ± 0.02 and 0.97 ± 0.01 for the left and right lung, 0.61 ± 0.10 for the esophagus, 0.81 ± 0.04 and 0.86 ± 0.04 for left and right atrium, 0.91 ± 0.02 and 0.84 ± 0.04 for left and right ventricle, and 0.21 ± 0.11 for the left anterior descending artery (LAD), respectively. Except for the LAD, the median difference in mean dose to these structures was small with absolute (relative) differences < 0.1 Gy (6 %). Conclusions: Except for the LAD, our method demonstrated excellent performance and can be generalized to segment additional structures of interest.
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.