ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Real-time target localization on 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging linac orthogonal cine images using transfer learning.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of daily volumetric imaging on target tracking without fiducial markers during robotic treatment of pancreas.Physics in medicine and biology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Deep learning-based tumor tracking is promising for real-time magnetic-resonance-imaging (MRI)-guided radiotherapy. We investigate the applicability of a tumor tracking model developed for 0.35 T MRI-linac sagittal cine-MRI for 1.5 T interleaved orthogonal cine-MRI and implement transfer learning to further improve its performance. Materials and methods: We collected 3600 cine-MRI frames in sagittal, coronal and axial planes from 24 patients (validation 10, testing 14) treated on a 1.5 T MRI-linac, where two expert clinicians manually segmented target labels. A transformer-based deformation model trained on 0.35T MRI-linac images (baseline model, BL) was evaluated and used as a starting point to train patient-specific (PS) models. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the surface distance (50th and 95th percentiles, SD50%, SD95%) were used to compare the obtained target segmentations with the ground truth labels. The percentage of negative Jacobian determinant values (NegJ), accounting for the folding pixel ratio, was determined. Results: Outperformed by all the PS models, the BL model averaged in a DSC of 0.85, SD50% of 1.9 mm, SD95% of 5.9 mm and NegJ of 0.45 % in testing. The best PS model averaged in a DSC of 0.90, SD50% of 1.3 mm, SD95% of 3.9 mm and NegJ of 0.02 % in testing. Conclusion: We have found the 0.35 T model trained on sagittal cine-MRIs cannot be directly applied to a 1.5 T interleaved orthogonal cine-MRI system. However, PS transfer learning could improve the target tracking performance and reach an accuracy comparable to the inter-observer variability.
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.