ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2026
Evaluating dose distribution in prostate IMRT patients using deep learning: the influence of loss function on model performance.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To estimate the influence of various loss functions on the performance of deep learning (DL) models for dose prediction in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer. A retrospective dataset comprising 110 prostate cancer patients was utilized. DL model was trained using various loss functions: mean absolute error (MAE), mean squared error (MSE), and combinations of MAE with predefined domain-specific knowledge, including dose-volume histogram (DVH) loss and moment loss function. The planned target volume (PTV) and dosimetric metrics for organs at risk (OARs) were used to assess the model's performance. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to perform statistical comparisons between the clinical and predicted plans. In terms of dose deviations for OARs and PTV, the model trained with MAE plus moment loss performed better than models trained with MAE + DVH loss, MSE, or MAE. The MAE ± standard deviation (SD) between clinical and predicted dose distributions in the test cohort were (1.76 ± 0.5) Gy, (1.78 ± 0.5) Gy, (1.93 ± 0.6) Gy, and (2.02 ± 0.4) Gy for MAE + moment, MAE + DVH, MSE, and MAE models, respectively. Compared to the ground truth plans, the accuracy of all predicted plans was clinically acceptable. This study highlights how important loss function choice is to the optimization of DL-based prostate IMRT dose prediction models. The performance of the model is greatly improved by incorporating domain-specific knowledge into the loss function, which supports the possible practical application of such models for more precise and personalized radiation planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41627650What 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.