ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Incorporating patient-specific information for the development of rectal tumor auto-segmentation models for online adaptive magnetic resonance Image-guided radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of deep learning-based segmentation and registration using pre-treatment contours for online rectal delineation in magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- From standardized to individualized margins for online adaptive tumor dose escalation in rectal cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Efficient strategy for magnetic resonance image-guided adaptive radiotherapy of rectal cancer using a library of reference plans.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: In online adaptive magnetic resonance image (MRI)-guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT), manual contouring of rectal tumors on daily images is labor-intensive and time-consuming. Automation of this task is complex due to substantial variation in tumor shape and location between patients. The aim of this work was to investigate different approaches of propagating patient-specific prior information to the online adaptive treatment fractions to improve deep-learning based auto-segmentation of rectal tumors. Materials and methods: 243 T2-weighted MRI scans of 49 rectal cancer patients treated on the 1.5T MR-Linear accelerator (MR-Linac) were utilized to train models to segment rectal tumors. As benchmark, an MRI_only auto-segmentation model was trained. Three approaches of including a patient-specific prior were studied: 1. include the segmentations of fraction 1 as extra input channel for the auto-segmentation of subsequent fractions, 2. fine-tuning of the MRI_only model to fraction 1 (PSF_1) and 3. fine-tuning of the MRI_only model on all earlier fractions (PSF_cumulative). Auto-segmentations were compared to the manual segmentation using geometric similarity metrics. Clinical impact was assessed by evaluating post-treatment target coverage. Results: All patient-specific methods outperformed the MRI_only segmentation approach. Median 95th percentile Hausdorff (95HD) were 22.0 (range: 6.1-76.6) mm for MRI_only segmentation, 9.9 (range: 2.5-38.2) mm for MRI+prior segmentation, 6.4 (range: 2.4-17.8) mm for PSF_1 and 4.8 (range: 1.7-26.9) mm for PSF_cumulative. PSF_cumulative was found to be superior to PSF_1 from fraction 4 onward (p = 0.014). Conclusion: Patient-specific fine-tuning of automatically segmented rectal tumors, using images and segmentations from all previous fractions, yields superior quality compared to other auto-segmentation approaches.
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.