ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026
Trustworthy artificial intelligence in radiation oncology: cross-industry lessons for development, validation, and deployment.
Review in Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding across the radiation oncology workflow, with applications spanning imaging, contouring, treatment planning, quality assurance, outcome prediction, workflow automation, and clinical decision support. Although technical progress has accelerated substantially, successful clinical translation remains inconsistent. Many of the challenges limiting implementation are not unique to radiation oncology and have previously emerged across healthcare and other high-stakes industries. In this narrative review, we examine radiation oncology AI through the broader lens of cross-industry AI development and deployment. We first summarize the current landscape of AI applications in radiation oncology and then analyze representative examples of successful and unsuccessful AI implementation from healthcare and other sectors. These experiences reveal recurring themes that strongly influence clinical AI success, including data representativeness, robust validation, workflow-centered design, human-AI collaboration, uncertainty management, bias mitigation, operational boundaries, and continuous performance monitoring. We discuss how these lessons apply directly to radiation oncology, where AI systems must function within complex clinical workflows involving imaging, planning, adaptive treatment, quality assurance, and longitudinal patient management. Emerging agentic and multimodal AI systems further amplify both opportunities and risks associated with deployment. Ultimately, the future impact of AI in radiation oncology will likely depend less on isolated algorithmic performance than on the development of trustworthy clinical AI ecosystems. Successful implementation will require rigorous validation, seamless workflow integration, human oversight, regulatory governance, and continuous adaptation. Lessons from healthcare and other industries suggest that the greatest and most durable clinical value may arise from AI systems that augment human expertise, cognitive workflows, and multidisciplinary decision-making rather than replace clinical decision-makers.
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.