ArticleJournal of medical physics
Retrospective Comparison of Geometrical Accuracy among Atlas-based Auto-segmentation, Deep Learning Auto-segmentation, and Deformable Image Registration in the Treatment Replanning for Adaptive Radiotherapy of Head-and-Neck Cancer.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the geometrical accuracy of atlas-based auto-segmentation (ABAS), deformable image registration (DIR), and deep learning auto-segmentation (DLAS) in adaptive radiotherapy (ART) for head-and-neck cancer (HNC). Subjects and Methods: Seventeen patients who underwent replanning for ART were retrospectively studied, and delineated contours on their replanning computed tomography (CT2) images were delineated. For DIR, the planning CT image (CT1) of the evaluated patients was utilized. In contrast, ABAS was performed using an atlas dataset comprising 30 patients who were not part of the evaluated group. DLAS was trained with 143 patients from different patients from the evaluated patients. The ABAS model was improved, and a modified ABAS (mABAS) was created by adding the evaluated patients' own CT1 to the atlas datasets of ABAS (number of patients of the atlas dataset, 31). The geometrical accuracy of DIR, DLAS, ABAS, and mABAS was evaluated. Results: The Dice similarity coefficient in DIR was the highest, at >0.8 at all organs at risk. The mABAS was delineated slightly more accurately than the standard ABAS. There was no significant difference between ABAS and DLAS in delineation accuracy. DIR had the lowest Hausdorff distance (HD) value (within 10 mm). The HD values in ABAS, mABAS, and DLAS were within 16 mm. Conclusions: DIR delineation is the most geometrically accurate ART for HNC.
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.