ArticleRadiation oncology journal2026
Clinically validated deep learning auto-contouring for glioblastoma volumetric modulated arc therapy planning: a dosimetric equivalence study.
Article in Radiation oncology journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeManual delineation of target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs) for glioblastoma radiotherapy is a critical bottleneck prone to inter-observer variability. This study developed a fully automated, dual-modality deep learning framework to validate its clinical utility by demonstrating the dosimetric equivalence of generated contours against an expert standard. MATERIALS AND
methodsA deep learning framework was developed using a retrospective dataset of 100 patients. It integrates two specialized networks operating without pre-alignment: a specialized dual-encoder attention U-Net for computed tomography (CT) (used for OARs delineation and dose calculation), and a single-encoder attention U-Net for T2-FLAIR magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (used for precise target volumes definition). A modality dispatcher routes images to the appropriate model. Geometric performance was evaluated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). For clinical validation, automated CT contours were used to generate volumetric modulated arc therapy plans. These plans were compared to those based on expert manual contours via paired statistical analysis.
resultsThe framework demonstrated excellent geometric accuracy on the independent test set. Mean planning target volume (PTV) DSC was 0.94 ± 0.03 on MRI and 0.92 ± 0.04 on CT. Dosimetric analysis confirmed clinical viability. No statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed between automated and manual plans for PTV coverage (D₉₅%), OAR maximum doses, or any evaluated metric.
conclusionThe automated framework provides accurate segmentation on both CT and MRI. Demonstrated dosimetric equivalence validates clinical reliability and potential to enhance planning efficiency while reducing inter-observer variability.
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.