ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
From data to treatment plan: An AI-driven path for automated breast radiotherapy planning.
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. 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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer is one of the most prevalent malignancies in women, with radiotherapy (RT) playing a key role in its treatment. Advances in RT techniques, such as 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), have improved dose precision and reduced side effects. However, RT modality selection and treatment planning remain manual, time-consuming, and subject to variability. PURPOSE: This study presents and validates TARS-B (Treatment Automation and Radiotherapy Selection for Breast Cancer), an automated framework that combines a deep learning-based decision-making module (DMF) for selecting the optimal RT technique and a fully automated treatment planning system (ATP) for generating deliverable plans that meet clinical quality standards and are deemed acceptable for clinical use. MATERIALS AND
methodsTARS-B functions in two stages. First, the DMF analyzes individual patient data to determine whether 3D-CRT or IMRT is more appropriate. Second, the ATP generates the corresponding treatment plan. For 3D-CRT, a field-in-field (FiF) method is used to enhance dose homogeneity and minimize hotspots. For IMRT, the DMF provides neural network-based dose predictions, which are used to generate constraints for organs-at-risk (OARs). Both processes are fully scripted within the treatment planning system (TPS). The framework was tested on 60 breast cancer patients: 30 originally treated with 3D-CRT and 30 with IMRT. Two analyses were conducted. First, the ATP's performance was evaluated by comparing automated plans with their manually generated clinical counterparts for both techniques. Second, the full TARS-B pipeline was assessed by applying the DMF to select the RT modality and automatically generating the plan, comparing results to the original clinical plans. Dosimetric parameters, including planning target volume (PTV) coverage, OAR constraints, and low- and intermediate-dose bath, were analyzed. Planning times were also compared.
resultsNo statistically significant differences (
conclusionsTARS-B effectively automates both the selection of the most appropriate RT technique and the generation of high-quality treatment plans. This framework improves workflow efficiency, reduces planning time, and preserves dosimetric quality, highlighting its potential for clinical implementation in breast cancer RT.
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.