ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Head and neck automatic multi-organ segmentation on Dual-Energy Computed Tomography.
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.
- Robust automatic soft tissue flap segmentation using a challenging case-enriched nnU-Net in head and neck CT images.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Consistency evaluation and performance optimization of deep learning-based auto-contouring for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Geometric, dosimetric and psychometric evaluation of three commercial AI software solutions for OAR auto-segmentation in head and neck radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 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: Deep-learning-based automatic segmentation is widely used in radiation oncology to delineate organs-at-risk. Dual-energy CT (DECT) allows the reconstruction of enhanced contrast images that could help with manual and auto-delineation. This paper presents a performance evaluation of a commercial auto-segmentation software on image series generated by a DECT. Material and methods: Different types of DECT images from seventy four head-and-neck (HN) patients were retrieved, including polyenergetic images at different voltages [80 kV reconstructed with a kernel corresponding to the commercial algorithm DirectDensity™ (PEI80-DD), 80 kV (PEI80), 120 kV-mixed (PEI120)] and a virtual-monoenergetic image at 40 keV (VMI40). Delineations used for treatment planning were considered as ground truth (GT) and were compared with the auto-segmentations performed on the 4 DECT images. A blinded qualitative evaluation of 3 structures (thyroid, left parotid, left nodes level II) was carried out. Performance metrics were calculated for thirteen HN structures to evaluate the auto-contours including dice similarity coefficient (DSC), 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (95HD) and mean surface distance (MSD). Results: We observed a high rate of low scores for PEI80-DD and VMI40 auto-segmentations on the thyroid and for GT and VMI40 contours on the nodes level II. All images received excellent scores for the parotid glands. The metrics comparison between GT and auto-segmented contours revealed that PEI80-DD had the highest DSC scores, significantly outperforming other reconstructed images for all organs (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results indicate that the auto-contouring system cannot generalize to images derived from DECT acquisition. It is therefore crucial to identify which organs benefit from these acquisitions to adapt the training datasets accordingly.
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.