ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Harmonizing organ-at-risk structure names using open-source large language models.
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.
- Large language models for scalable standardization in radiation oncology.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Standardized radiotherapy structure nomenclature is crucial for automation, inter-institutional collaborations, and large-scale deep learning studies in radiation oncology. Despite the availability of nomenclature guidelines (AAPM-TG-263), their implementation is lacking and still faces challenges. This study evaluated open-source large language models (LLMs) for automated organ-at-risk (OAR) renaming on a multi-institutional and multilingual dataset. Materials and methods: Four open-source LLMs (Llama 3.3, Llama 3.3 R1, DeepSeek V3, DeepSeek R1) were evaluated using a dataset of 34,177 OAR structures from 1684 patients collected at three university medical centers with manual TG-263 ground-truth labels. LLM renaming was performed using a few-shot prompting technique, including detailed instructions and generic examples. Performance was assessed by calculating renaming accuracy on the entire dataset and a unique dataset (duplicates removed). In addition, we performed a failure analysis, prompt-based confidence correlation, and Monte Carlo sampling-based uncertainty estimation. Results: High renaming accuracy was achieved, with the reasoning-enhanced DeepSeek R1 model performing best (98.6 % unique accuracy, 99.9 % overall accuracy). Overall, reasoning models outperformed their non-reasoning counterparts. Monte Carlo sampling showed a stronger correlation with prediction errors (correlation coefficient of 0.70 for DeepSeek R1) and better error detection (Sensitivity 0.73, Specificity 1.0 for DeepSeek R1) compared to prompt-based confidence estimation (correlation coefficient < 0.42). Conclusions: Open-source LLMs, particularly those with reasoning capabilities, can accurately harmonize OAR nomenclature according to TG-263 across diverse multilingual and multi-institutional datasets. They can also facilitate TG-263 nomenclature adoption and the creation of large, standardized datasets for research and AI development.
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.