ArticleCureus2025
Efficiency and Clinical Utility of AI-Assisted Radiotherapy Planning Using RatoGuide for Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Clinical edge-case stress testing of two Asia-developed AI auto-contouring systems using prostate radiotherapy planning CT images.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- AI-assisted VMAT planning incorporating deep learning-based dose prediction for head and neck cancer: feasibility of quality standardization and human intervention for irregular cases.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates the efficiency and dosimetric performance of RatoGuide, an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted radiotherapy planning tool, by comparing AI-generated and manually created treatment plans for a 50-year-old male with right-sided oropharyngeal cancer (cT2N2bM0, cStage IVA) who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Treatment plans were created using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) following the approach used by the Japanese Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) protocol. RatoGuide generated two plans: one prioritizing the planning target volume (PTV) and the other focusing on organs at risk (OAR), while an experienced radiation oncologist manually developed a plan using a treatment planning system (TPS). Dosimetric comparisons focused on target coverage, OAR sparing, and dose homogeneity. Results showed that both AI-generated and TPS plans achieved comparable PTV coverage, with nearly identical values for Dmin, Dmean, and Dmax. The TPS plan exhibited slightly better dose homogeneity, whereas the AI-generated plan provided superior OAR sparing, particularly for the spinal cord and parotid glands, reducing the spinal cord's intermediate-dose volume (V30) by approximately 40%. However, the AI plan yielded slightly higher mean doses to both submandibular glands, though still within clinically acceptable thresholds. Additionally, the AI planning workflow was completed in just 30 minutes, significantly reducing the time required for manual planning. RatoGuide demonstrated efficiency in generating high-quality treatment plans, achieving comparable PTV coverage, and improving OAR sparing in certain areas. However, minor refinements are needed to optimize dose homogeneity and further minimize submandibular gland exposure. These findings suggest that AI-assisted planning has the potential to enhance radiotherapy efficiency and consistency.
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.