ArticleRadiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology2025
Knowledge-based planning, multicriteria optimization, and plan scorecards: A winning combination.
Article in Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2025. 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.
- Can physics review catch prescription and PTV margin errors in fully automated radiotherapy plans? A hazard study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- A rule-based, feedback-driven framework for fully automated prostate VMAT planning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Parallel/Opposed: Automated treatment planning systems should be designed to minimize human intervention.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a quasi-automatic treatment planning workflow for head-and-neck cancer in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Sharing a flexible urethral sparing SBRT prostate RapidPlan model and quantifying plan quality via dosimetric scorecard with clinical implementation.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Dosimetric evaluation of Ethos 2.0 high-fidelity mode for single-isocenter SRS.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Validation of knowledge-based and multicriterial optimization assistive auto-planning algorithms for prostate VMAT radiotherapy using biological optimization.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- PlanAct: An eclipse scripting API-based module embedding clinical optimization strategies for automated planning in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of RapidPlan in Combination with Multicriteria Optimization for Cervix Radiotherapy Planning.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeThe ESTRO 2023 Physics Workshop hosted the Fully-Automated Radiotherapy Treatment Planning (Auto-RTP) Challenge, where participants were provided with CT images from 16 prostate cancer patients (6 prostate only, 6 prostate + nodes, and 4 prostate bed + nodes) across 3 challenge phases with the goal of automatically generating treatment plans with minimal user intervention. Here, we present our team's winning approach developed to swiftly adapt to both different contouring guidelines and treatment prescriptions than those used in our clinic. MATERIALS AND
methodsOur planning pipeline comprises two main components: 1) auto-contouring and 2) auto-planning engines, both internally developed and activated via DICOM operations. The auto-contouring engine employs 3D U-Net models trained on a dataset of 600 prostate cancer patients for normal tissues, 253 cases for pelvic lymph node, and 32 cases for prostate bed. The auto-planning engine, utilizing the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface, automates target volume definition, field geometry, planning parameters, optimization, and dose calculation. RapidPlan models, combined with multicriteria optimization and scorecards defined on challenge scoring criteria, were employed to ensure plans met challenge objectives. We report leaderboard scores (0-100, where 100 is a perfect score) which combine organ-at-risk and target dose-metrics on the provided cases.
resultsOur team secured 1st place across all three challenge phases, achieving leaderboard scores of 79.9, 77.3, and 78.5 outperforming 2nd place scores by margins of 6.4, 0.4, and 2.9 points for each phase, respectively. Highest plan scores were for prostate only cases, with an average score exceeding 90. Upon challenge completion, a "Plan Only" phase was opened where organizers provided contours for planning. Our current score of 90.0 places us at the top of the "Plan Only" leaderboard.
conclusionsOur automated pipeline demonstrates adaptability to diverse guidelines, indicating progress towards fully automated radiotherapy planning. Future studies are needed to assess the clinical acceptability and integration of automatically generated plans.
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.