ArticleMedical physics2025
Actor critic with experience replay-based automatic treatment planning for prostate cancer intensity modulated radiotherapy.
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.
- A universal framework for IMRT dose prediction.Medical physics · 2026Article
- A tandem reinforcement learning framework for localized prostate cancer treatment planning and machine parameter optimization.Medical physics · 2026Article
- New insights into automatic treatment planning for cancer radiotherapy using explainable artificial intelligence.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- Actor critic with experience replay-based automatic treatment planning for prostate cancer intensity modulated radiotherapy.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
backgroundAchieving highly efficient treatment planning in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is challenging due to the complex interactions between radiation beams and the human body. The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) has automated treatment planning, significantly improving efficiency. However, existing automatic treatment planning agents often rely on supervised or unsupervised AI models that require large datasets of high-quality patient data for training. Additionally, these networks are generally not universally applicable across patient cases from different institutions and can be vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Deep reinforcement learning (DRL), which mimics the trial-and-error process used by human planners, offers a promising new approach to address these challenges. PURPOSE: This work aims to develop a stochastic policy-based DRL agent for automatic treatment planning that facilitates effective training with limited datasets, universal applicability across diverse patient datasets, and robust performance under adversarial attacks.
methodsWe employ an actor-critic with experience replay (ACER) architecture to develop the automatic treatment planning agent. This agent operates the treatment planning system (TPS) for inverse treatment planning by automatically tuning treatment planning parameters (TPPs). We use prostate cancer IMRT patient cases as our testbed, which includes one target and two organs at risk (OARs), along with 18 discrete TPP tuning actions. The network takes dose-volume histograms (DVHs) as input and outputs a policy for effective TPP tuning, accompanied by an evaluation function for that policy. Training utilizes DVHs from treatment plans generated by an in-house TPS under randomized TPPs for a single patient case, with validation conducted on two other independent cases. Both online asynchronous learning and offline, sample-efficient experience replay methods are employed to update the network parameters. After training, six groups, comprising more than 300 initial treatment plans drawn from three datasets, were used for testing. These groups have beam and anatomical configurations distinct from those of the training case. The ProKnow scoring system for prostate cancer IMRT, with a maximum score of 9, is used to evaluate plan quality. The robustness of the network is further assessed through adversarial attacks using the fast gradient sign method (FGSM).
resultsDespite being trained on treatment plans from a single patient case, the network converges efficiently when validated on two independent cases. For testing performance, the mean
conclusionsWe successfully trained a DRL agent using the ACER technique for high-quality treatment planning in prostate cancer IMRT. It achieves high generality across diverse patient datasets and exhibits high robustness against adversarial attacks.
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.