Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39285649›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

Evaluation of deep learning based dose prediction in head and neck cancer patients using two different types of input contours.

Masahide Saito, Noriyuki Kadoya, Yuto Kimura, Hikaru Nemoto, Ryota Tozuka, Keiichi Jingu, Hiroshi Onishi

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Masahide SaitoDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8636-4045
Noriyuki KadoyaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku Univ. Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5018-3800
Yuto KimuraRadiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura, Japan.
Hikaru NemotoDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6540-2906
Ryota TozukaDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan.
Keiichi JinguDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku Univ. Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Hiroshi OnishiDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study evaluates deep learning (DL) based dose prediction methods in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients using two types of input contours. MATERIALS AND

methodsSeventy-five HNC patients undergoing two-step volumetric-modulated arc therapy were included. Dose prediction was performed using the AIVOT prototype (AiRato.Inc, Sendai, Japan), a commercial software with an HD U-net-based dose distribution prediction system. Models were developed for the initial plan (46 Gy/23Fr) and boost plan (24 Gy/12Fr), trained with 65 cases and tested with 10 cases. The 8-channel model used one target (PTV) and seven organs at risk (OARs), while the 10-channel model added two dummy contours (PTV ring and spinal cord PRV). Predicted and deliverable doses, obtained through dose mimicking on another radiation treatment planning system, were evaluated using dose-volume indices for PTV and OARs.

resultsFor the initial plan, both models achieved approximately 2% prediction accuracy for the target dose and maintained accuracy within 3.2 Gy for OARs. The 10-channel model outperformed the 8-channel model for certain dose indices. For the boost plan, both models exhibited prediction accuracies of approximately 2% for the target dose and 1 Gy for OARs. The 10-channel model showed significantly closer predictions to the ground truth for D50% and Dmean. Deliverable plans based on prediction doses showed little significant difference compared to the ground truth, especially for the boost plan.

conclusionDL-based dose prediction using the AIVOT prototype software in HNC patients yielded promising results. While additional contours may enhance prediction accuracy, their impact on dose mimicking is relatively small.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHead and Neck NeoplasmsOrgans at RiskRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAlgorithmsHumansPrognosisSoftwaredeep learning based dose predictionhead and neck cancervolumetric‐modulated arc therapy

Identifiers

PMID39285649
PMCPMC11633794

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.