Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42564190›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026

Trustworthy artificial intelligence in radiation oncology: cross-industry lessons for development, validation, and deployment.

Malinda Zhu, Lang Gou, Chi Zhang, Dandan Zheng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Malinda ZhuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, United States.
Lang GouCollege of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Chi ZhangSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, United States.
Dandan ZhengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AIclinical decision supporthuman-AI collaborationradiation oncologytrustworthy AIworkflow integration

Identifiers

PMID42564190
PMCPMC13442015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.