ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Quantification of head and neck cancer patients' anatomical changes during radiotherapy: Toward the prediction of replanning need.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026. 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.
- Quantification of head and neck cancer patients' anatomical changes during radiotherapy: Toward the prediction of replanning need.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHead and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) may experience anatomical changes during treatment, which can compromise the validity of the initial treatment plan, necessitating replanning. However, ad hoc replanning disrupts clinical workflows and increases workload. Currently, no standardized method exists to quantify anatomical variation that necessitates replanning. PURPOSE: This project aimed to create geometrical metrics to describe anatomical changes in HNC patients during RT. The usefulness of these metrics was evaluated by a univariate analysis and through machine learning (ML) models to predict the need for replanning.
methodsA cohort of 150 HNC patients treated at McGill University Health Centre was analyzed. Based on the shapes of the RT structures (body, PTV, mandible, neck, and submandibular contours), we developed 43 metrics and automatically calculated them through a Python pipeline that we called HNGeoNatomyX. Univariate analysis using linear regression was conducted to obtain the rate of change of each metric. We also obtained the relative variation of each metric between the pre-treatment and replanning-requested scans. Fraction-specific ML models (incorporating information available up to and including the specific fraction) for fractions 5, 10, and 15 were built using metrics, clinical data, and feature selection techniques. Model performance was estimated with repeated stratified 5-fold cross-validation resampling technique and the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
resultsUnivariate analysis showed that body- and neck-related metrics were most predictive of replanning need. Our best specific multivariate models for fractions 5, 10, and 15 yielded testing scores of 0.82, 0.70, and 0.79, respectively. Our models early predicted replanning for 76% of the true positives.
conclusionsThe created metrics have the potential to characterize and distinguish which patients will necessitate RT replanning. They show promise in guiding clinicians to evaluate RT replanning for HNC patients and streamline workflows.
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.