Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39838991›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025

Applying aperture-based intensity map in automated plan review of volumetric modulated arc therapy for lung cancer patients.

Peng Huang, Zhihui Hu, Jiawen Shang, Yuhan Fan, Zhixing Chang, Yingjie Xu, Jianrong Dai, Hui Yan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Peng Huang *Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Zhihui Hu *Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jiawen Shang *Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yuhan Fan *Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Zhixing Chang *Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yingjie XuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jianrong DaiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Hui YanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a popular radiotherapy technique in the clinic. As consisting of hundreds of control points in a VMAT plan it is more complex and time consuming than those conventional treatment modalities, such as intensity modulated radiation therapy. To improve the efficiency and accuracy of its quality assurance procedure, a novel automated anomaly detection method was proposed. Methods: The anomaly detection model was the Vanilla AutoEncoder (AE). The input was the aperture-based feature maps extracted from the VMAT treatment plan. The output was the reconstruction error in measuring the original and reconstructed feature maps via the low-dimensional latent variables in the bottleneck of the AE model. The AE model was first trained with feature maps extracted from regular plans, and a detection threshold alpha (α) over the distribution of reconstruction errors was then determined. If a larger reconstruction error was obtained for the testing plan, it was considered an anomaly. The data of VMAT plans of 677 patients undergoing lung cancer radiotherapy were collected and tested. The proposed AE was compared with four other classic detection models (principal components analysis, isolation forest, local outlier factor, and hierarchical density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise) using the testing set. To evaluate its reliability, two types of perturbation factors [leaf offset and monitor unit (MU)] were assessed. Results: Among the five tested models, the AE model achieved the best performance with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve equal to 0.943. The accuracy and precision of the AE model were 0.769 and 0.407, respectively, which were the highest among the five models. Additionally, in terms of reliability, the AE model was more sensitive in detecting leaf offset and less sensitive in detecting MU variation. Conclusions: In the automatic physics review of radiotherapy plans, the application of two-dimensional aperture-based feature maps to detect irregular VMAT plans via the AE model is both viable and effective for lung cancer patients.

Indexed as

anomaly detectionAutoEncoder (AE)physics plan reviewVolumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)

Identifiers

PMID39838991
PMCPMC11744153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.