ArticleMedical physics2025
A general model for head and neck auto-segmentation with patient pre-treatment imaging during adaptive radiation therapy.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence applications in adaptive radiotherapy-a narrative review.Translational cancer research · 2026Review
- The Evolving Role of Radiation Therapy Technologists in Head and Neck Cancer: A Narrative Review and Operational Framework.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- A deep learning-based automated pipeline for colorectal cancer detection in contrast-enhanced CT images.Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society · 2026Article
- A general model for head and neck auto-segmentation with patient pre-treatment imaging during adaptive radiation therapy.Medical physics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuring head and neck (HN) radiation therapy, patients may undergo anatomical changes due to tumor shrinkage or weight loss. For these patients, adaptive radiation therapy (ART) is required to correct treatment plans and to ensure that the prescribed radiation dose is delivered to the tumor while minimizing dose to the surrounding organs-at-risk (OARs). Patient pre-treatment images and segmentation labels are always available during ART and may be incorporated into deep learning (DL) auto-segmentation models to improve performance on mid-treatment images. PURPOSE: Existing DL methods typically incorporate pre-treatment data during training. In this work, we investigated whether including pre-treatment data at inference time would affect model performance, as inference-time inclusion would eliminate the requirement for costly model retraining for new patient cohorts.
methodsWe developed a general adaptive model (GAM) that included pre-treatment data at inference time through additional input channels. We compared the GAM with a patient-specific model (PSM), which included pre-treatment data during training, a reference model (RM), which did not include pre-treatment data, and a rigid image registration (RIR) method. Models were developed using a large dataset of pre- and mid-treatment computed tomography images and segmentation labels (primary gross tumor volume [GTVp] and 16 OARs) for 110 patients who underwent ART for HN cancer.
resultsThe GAM showed improved performance over the PSM and RM for several structures, with the largest differences in dice similarity coefficient for difficult-to-segment structures: the GTVp (RM: 0.17, PSM: 0.36, GAM: 0.61, RR: 0.65) and left/right brachial plexus (RM: 0.38/0.35, PSM: 0.43/0.43, GAM: 0.49/0.49, RR: 0.36/0.38). The GAM attained similar performance to RR for all structures except the brainstem (GAM: 0.82, RR: 0.74), mandible (GAM: 0.88, RR: 0.68), and spinal cord (GAM: 0.76, RR: 0.51), for which the GAM performed higher.
conclusionThe inclusion of patient pre-treatment images and segmentation labels can improve auto-segmentation performance during HN ART, in particular for structures with high variability or low contrast. Including pre-treatment data at DL model inference time (GAM) may give improvements over standard DL models for the GTVp and several OARs, while eliminating the need for costly model retraining with new patient cohorts. However, rigid registration provides similar performance to adaptive DL models for the GTVp and most OARs.
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.