ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
Improving the performance of deep learning models in predicting and classifying gamma passing rates with discriminative features and a class balancing technique: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. 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.
- Prediction of patient-specific quality assurance for volumetric modulated arc therapy using machine log files.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Interpretable AI for treatment decision-making in immunoradiotherapy of locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to improve the deep learning (DL) model performance in predicting and classifying IMRT gamma passing rate (GPR) by using input features related to machine parameters and a class balancing technique.
methodsA total of 2348 fields from 204 IMRT plans for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma were retrospectively collected to form a dataset. Input feature maps, including fluence, leaf gap, leaf speed of both banks, and corresponding errors, were constructed from the dynamic log files. The SHAP framework was employed to compute the impact of each feature on the model output for recursive feature elimination. A series of UNet++ based models were trained on the obtained eight feature sets with three fine-tuning methods including the standard mean squared error (MSE) loss, a re-sampling technique, and a proposed weighted MSE loss (WMSE). Differences in mean absolute error, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were compared between the different models.
resultsThe models trained with feature sets including leaf speed and leaf gap features predicted GPR for failed fields more accurately than the other models (F(7, 147) = 5.378, p < 0.001). The WMSE loss had the highest accuracy in predicting GPR for failed fields among the three fine-tuning methods (F(2, 42) = 14.149, p < 0.001), while an opposite trend was observed in predicting GPR for passed fields (F(2, 730) = 9.907, p < 0.001). The WMSE_FS5 model achieved a superior AUC (0.92) and more balanced sensitivity (0.77) and specificity (0.89) compared to the other models.
conclusionsMachine parameters can provide discriminative input features for GPR prediction in DL. The novel weighted loss function demonstrates the ability to balance the prediction and classification accuracy between the passed and failed fields. The proposed approach is able to improve the DL model performance in predicting and classifying GPR, and can potentially be integrated into the plan optimization process to generate higher deliverability plans.
trial registrationThis clinical trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on March 26th, 2020 (registration number: ChiCTR2000031276). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/ChiCTR2000031276.
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.