ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
An interactive deep-learning workflow for head and neck gross tumour volume segmentation.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Couch Correction in Head and Neck Radiotherapy: A Narrative Review of Action-Oriented Positioning Management.Cancers · 2026Review
- Direct integration of deep learning-based GTV auto-segmentation into a clinical radiotherapy planning system.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Beyond auto-segmentation: the case for planning and dosimetry AI in head and neck radiation oncology.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
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: Deep learning (DL)-based auto-segmentation of head and neck cancer (HNC) gross tumour volumes remains challenging due to anatomical complexity and limited accuracy. We propose an interactive DL (iDL) workflow that integrates clinician input to enhance segmentation performance and clinical usability. The iDL approach was evaluated using simulations on two datasets and an observer study. Materials and methods: Two iDL approaches were developed and integrated into a workflow: (1) for primary tumour (GTVt) segmentation, clinicians marked the tumour centre and delineated three orthogonal slices to enable patient-specific fine-tuning of a pre-trained 3D UNet; (2) for lymph nodes (GTVn), clinician-provided clicks identified involved lymph nodes used as attention maps in a separate UNet. Methods were evaluated using independent simulations on an internal dataset (n = 204) and the HECKTOR 2022 dataset (n = 524), using aggregated dice-similarity-coefficient (DSCagg). An additional observer study with three radiation oncologists assessed usability and efficiency, using normalized added path length (APL) and the System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: The iDL workflow achieved high segmentation accuracy, with a DSCagg of 0.84 (internal) and 0.88 (HECKTOR) for GTVt, and 0.83 and 0.85 for GTVn. GTVn required minimal correction (mean APL: 4 % vs. 6 % vs. 11 %); two observers made limited corrections to GTVt (mean APL: 11 % vs. 6 % vs. 39 %). Mean segmentation time was 12 min per case. SUS scores ranged from 87.5 to 100, indicating high usability. Conclusion: The iDL workflow achieved high accuracy and usability with limited correction time, offering a practical and efficient solution for HNC segmentation in radiotherapy.
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.