ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Quality assurance incorporating artificial intelligence-generated reference contours in a phase II radiotherapy trial.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: A dummy run quality assurance was conducted for a prospective phase II trial of tailored radiotherapy (RT) according to the response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery in locally advanced breast cancer (RTaNAC). Since inter-institutional variations in dose distributions can impact clinical outcomes, this dummy run aimed to develop an RT plan protocol to minimize these variations. Material and methods: This study involved computed tomography images from three clinical scenarios: RT with no lymph node (LN) boost (Scenario 1), LN boost up to 60 Gy Results: Inter-institutional variation observed in Step 1 improved in Step 2 for breast and regional nodal areas. Specifically for Scenario 1, dose coverage for the nodal clinical target volumes of the axillary level I LN improved from 57.5% to 97.5% (p-value = 0.075), and that of the supraclavicular LN improved from 75.6% to 88.8% (p-value = 0.046). Conclusion: Variations in dose/volume metrics among institutions were mitigated by AI auto-contoured structures and LN boost target volume information. Through this dummy run, the participating institutions reached a consensus on an RT plan protocol to support multi-institutional expansion of RTaNAC.
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.