ArticleEcancermedicalscience2026
Benchmarking of radiobiological NTCP models in head and neck radiotherapy using independent computational pipelines: an institutional validation study with machine learning augmentation.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & purpose: Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models require institutional validation before clinical implementation. Traditional radiobiological models, such as the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD) models, provide mechanistic dose-response frameworks, while machine learning (ML) approaches offer exploratory, data-driven alternatives that remain inadequately characterised in South Asian populations. Methods: This retrospective study included 51 head and neck cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy. Binary endpoints were Grade ≥2 xerostomia (n = 3), dysphagia (n = 5) and mucositis (n = 4), scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. NTCP calculations were performed using two independent computational pipelines (MATLAB-based RBMODELv1 and a Python implementation), with agreement assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. Traditional NTCP models (LKB, EUD) were evaluated and compared with artificial neural networks and XGBoost in a hypothesis-generating framework using a stratified 70:30 train-test split. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (area under the curve), accuracy and Spearman's rank correlation. Results: Excellent agreement was observed between computational pipelines (mean bias 0.8%, 95% limits -1.9% to 3.5%). Traditional models demonstrated strong rank-order correlation with toxicity grades (ρ = 0.61-0.79, p < 0.001) and high accuracy (LKB: 90.0%-94.1%). Institution-specific parameters differed from quantitative analyses of normal tissue effects in the clinic values, including a lower parotid TD50 (34.1 versus 39.0 Gy). Exploratory ML analyses showed numerically higher discrimination for parallel organs but not for mixed-architecture structures; however, severe class imbalance (3-5 events per endpoint) limits statistical reliability. Conclusion: Dual computational pipelines enable reproducible NTCP modeling for institutional use. Traditional radiobiological models perform acceptably after local calibration, while exploratory ML findings suggest potential organ-architecture-dependent patterns that require validation in adequately powered multi-institutional cohorts.
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.