ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Transformer-based cardiac substructure segmentation from contrast and non-contrast computed tomography for radiotherapy planning.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Accurate segmentation of cardiac substructures on computed tomography (CT) scans is essential for radiotherapy planning. This study evaluated whether pretrained transformers enabled data-efficient training using a fixed architecture with balanced curriculum learning while achieving robust generalization to imaging and patient variations. Materials and Methods: A hybrid pretrained transformer-convolutional network, self-distilled masked image transformer (SMIT), was fine-tuned using lung cancer patient scans (Cohort I, training N = 180) and tested on held-out Cohort I lung cancer scans (testing N = 60) and breast cancer scans (Cohort II, N = 65). Two configurations were evaluated: SMIT-Balanced (32 contrast-enhanced CTs, 32 non-contrast CTs) and SMIT-Oracle (180 CTs). Performance was compared with nnU-Net and TotalSegmentator. Segmentation accuracy was assessed primarily using the 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95), along with radiation dose and overlap-based metrics as secondary endpoints. Results: SMIT-Balanced approached SMIT-Oracle performance despite using 64% fewer training scans, with mean HD95 of 6.6 versus 5.4 mm in Cohort I and 10.0 versus 9.4 mm in Cohort II. On the Cohort I held-out test set, SMIT-Balanced mean HD95 was within 1.0 mm of nnU-Net. Cross-cohort testing showed larger accuracy degradation with nnU-Net than SMIT-Balanced (62% versus 50%, absolute change 4.5 mm versus 3.4 mm). Dose metrics derived from SMIT-Balanced were equivalent to manual delineations. Conclusions: Balanced curriculum training reduced labeled data requirements within the SMIT architecture. SMIT-Balanced was comparable to nnU-Net on Cohort I held-out data and showed smaller cross-cohort HD95 degradation.
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.