ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
Impact of deep learning on CT-based organ-at-risk delineation for flank irradiation in paediatric renal tumours: a SIOP-RTSG radiotherapy committee study.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2026. 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.
- Inter-observer variability in radiotherapy contouring with the use of autocontouring software: A systematic review.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Review
- Reply to comment on impact of deep learning on CT-based organ-at-risk delineation for flank irradiation in paediatric renal tumours: A SIOP-RTSG radiotherapy committee.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Comment on "Deep learning in CT-based organ-at-risk delineation for pediatric flank irradiation": Methodological and clinical considerations.Clinical and translational 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Integrating deep learning (DL) for auto-contouring has significantly improved organ-at-risk (OAR) delineation in adult radiotherapy. However, its application in paediatric radiotherapy remains limited. This study evaluates DL-based auto-contouring of OARs, followed by manual revisions, for paediatric flank irradiation, focusing on delineation time, accuracy, and inter-observer variability (IOV). Materials and methods: Twelve paediatric radiation oncologists from nine countries affiliated with the SIOP Renal Tumour Study Group participated in a two-day workshop. Participants were randomly divided into two groups: one performed manual delineation first, followed by DL-based revision, while the other group performed in reverse order. Eight thoracoabdominal OARs were delineated on non-contrast CTs of renal tumour patients (ages 1-6). DL-based contours were generated using a model for paediatric abdominal cases. Delineation time was recorded, accuracy and IOV were assessed using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), 95th percentile Hausdorff distance, mean surface distance against a STAPLE consensus (threshold = 0.95), and an expert reference. Results: In total, 122 manual delineations and 254 DL-based revisions were collected. DL-based auto-contouring reduced delineation time by 59 %, from 25.5 to 10.2 min. The mean DSC of all eight OARs improved from 0.91 to 0.97 using STAPLE reference and from 0.89 to 0.93 using expert reference. The pancreas exhibited the largest gain, with mean DSC increases ranging from 0.18 to 0.25. Delineation accuracy was significantly improved for seven OARs (p < 0.05), while IOV significantly decreased for the pancreas and heart in both references (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Manually revising DL-based auto-contouring reduces delineation time, enhances accuracy, and reduces inter-observer variability in paediatric CT-based OAR delineation.
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.