ArticleJournal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute2026
A prospective development and evaluation of a 2D convolutional neural network-based auto-segmentation model for cervical cancer radiotherapy.
Article in Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate delineation of target volumes and organs at risk (OAR) is essential in radiotherapy planning for cervical cancer. Deep learning (DL)-based auto-segmentation has the potential to improve contouring efficiency and workflow. This study reports the prospective development and internal validation of a DL-based auto-segmentation model- Deep contour (DC) for cervical cancer radiotherapy.
methodsIn this prospective single-institution study, a 2-dimensional convolutional neural network based on the LinkNet architecture, DC, was trained on 190 computed tomography (CT) datasets for abdominal and pelvic OARs and 90 cervical cancer datasets for target volumes. Independent validation was performed on 20 CT datasets. Model performance was evaluated using dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Jaccard Index (JI), 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95), average symmetric surface distance (ASSD), and surface dice coefficient (NSD). Expert internal and external radiation oncologists qualitatively explored clinical acceptability using a Likert scale, and segmentation time was compared with manual contouring.
resultsThe DC demonstrated the greatest geometric performance for the femur (DSC 0.92 ± 0.03; NSD 0.94 ± 0.04), bowel bag (DSC 0.89 ± 0.03; NSD 0.77 ± 0.12), and bladder (DSC 0.88 ± 0.14; NSD 0.87 ± 0.12). Among the target volumes, the inguinal nodal clinical target volume (CTVn_inguinal) achieved the greatest agreement (DSC 0.77 ± 0.04; NSD 0.76 ± 0.07). Moderate performance was observed for the rectum (DSC 0.75 ± 0.16), liver (DSC 0.73 ± 0.21), and pelvic nodal clinical target volume (CTVn_pelvis) (DSC 0.60 ± 0.10), whereas lower performance was observed for anatomically complex structures such as the duodenum, anal canal, common bile duct, pancreas, and pelvic vessels. Clinical evaluation of two cases revealed a Likert score of III-IV for key pelvic organs, such as the bladder, femur, pelvic bowel bag, rectum, and sigmoid. Auto-segmentation significantly reduced the segmentation time from 77 min to 5 s per dataset (p < 0.001).
conclusionsThis prospective validation demonstrates that DC auto-segmentation model can achieve acceptable geometric performance congruent across multiple abdominal and pelvic OARs and reasonable geometric performance for the elective inguinal CTV volume. Further validation on larger datasets and evaluation of clinical workflow integration are warranted. REGISTRY: CTRI, TRN: CTRI/2024/02/063055, Registration date: February 22, 2024.
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.