ArticleClinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))2025
Under-representation for Female Pelvis Cancers in Commercial Auto-segmentation Solutions and Open-source Imaging Datasets.
Article in Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of AI-based auto-contouring tools in radiotherapy: A single-institution study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Sex-Based Bias in Artificial Intelligence-Based Segmentation Models in Clinical Oncology.Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) · 2025Review
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
Abstract
aimArtificial intelligence (AI) based auto-segmentation aids radiation therapy (RT) workflows and is being adopted in clinical environments facilitated by the increased availability of commercial solutions for organs at risk (OARs). In addition, open-source imaging datasets support training for new auto-segmentation algorithms. Here, we studied if the female and male anatomies are equally represented among these solutions. MATERIALS AND
methodsInquiries were sent to eight vendors regarding their clinically available OAR auto-segmentation solutions for each gender. The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) was also screened for publicly available imaging datasets specific to the female and the male anatomy.
resultsAll vendors provided AI based auto-segmentation solutions for the male pelvis and female breasts, while 5/8 vendors provided solutions for the female pelvis. The female breast and the female pelvis solutions were released at a median of 0.6 years and 2.3 years, respectively, after the release of the male pelvis solutions. Among 27 TCIA datasets identified, 15 involved the female anatomy (breast: 10; pelvis: 5) and 12 involved the male pelvis but no female-specific dataset included OAR segmentations, while three male pelvis datasets included OARs (ejaculatory duct, neurovascular bundle, penile bulb and verumontanum).
conclusionCommercial AI auto-segmentation solutions and open-source imaging datasets include considerably more solutions and OAR segmentations for male cancer over female cancer sites. This gender disparity is likely to propagate throughout the RT pipeline.
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.