Trial reportMedical physics2026
Evaluation of AI-derived LAD artery dose metrics for survival stratification in stage III NSCLC: A secondary analysis of RTOG 0617 trial.
Trial report in Medical physics, 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
Abstract
backgroundWhile the radiation dose to left anterior descending (LAD) artery is associated with overall survival (OS) in NSCLC patients, manual segmentation is labor-intensive. Several auto-segmentation models were developed on average 4DCT with promising geometric agreement, yet their feasibility in clinical outcome analysis on lung CT remains unclear. PURPOSE: This study evaluates whether automated LAD segmentation can reproduce, at the group level, the established dose-survival association in a multi-institutional clinical trial dataset.
methodsThree deep learning-based auto-segmentation (DLAS) models for automatic segmentation of the LAD coronary artery were applied to 460 patients from the NRG Oncology/RTOG 0617 dataset. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) were calculated using each model's segmentation. The LAD V15 Gy was used to stratify patients into high-and low-risk groups, and the cut-off values were determined by minimizing mean absolute error (MAE) between DLAS-derived and manual OS curves.
resultsAll three models demonstrated significantly different OS curves between the high risk and low risk groups (p < 0.05). The HR was 1.40 (95% CI: 1.02-1.93; p = 0.0381; MAE = 7.1%), 1.32 (95% CI: 1.03-1.68; p = 0.0258; MAE = 9.6%), and 1.37 (95% CI: 1.03-1.84; p = 0.0331; MAE = 7.9%) for the three models using a common V15 Gy ≥ 10% cut-off. After optimizing the cut-off, one model aligned well with what was derived from manual segmentation (MAE = 4.3%).
conclusionAmong the evaluated models, one DL model showed the strongest performance of survival groups separation and achieved group-level overall survival stratification comparable to that previously reported using manual contours in the multi-institutional cohort. Further validation with paired manual contours and pre-specified cutoffs is warranted.
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.