ArticleBiomedical physics & engineering express2026
External evaluation of a deep learning-based algorithm for automated lung tumor and esophagus segmentation on CBCT.
Article in Biomedical physics & engineering express, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Online adaptive radiotherapy requires fast and accurate delineation of targets and organs at risk on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Although deep learning (DL)-based CBCT auto-segmentation methods have been proposed, their clinical generalizability remains insufficiently validated. This study aimed to externally evaluate a pretrained DL model for lung tumor and esophagus segmentation on CBCT. Originally trained using C-arm linac CBCT images, the model was directly applied to an independent cohort of 12 lung cancer patients, each with 5 CBCT images acquired at a separate institution on an O-ring linac. Rigid propagation of planning CT contours served as a minimal baseline to determine whether the model matched or outperformed conventional rigid registration for gross tumor volume (GTV) and esophagus segmentation using geometric and dosimetric measures. Compared with rigid contour propagation, the model significantly improved GTV segmentation accuracy, with mean Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) increasing from 0.66 to 0.76. Significant differences in GTV D98% were observed between the model-generated contours and the reference contours (50.69 vs 53.58 Gy). The model showed a statistically non-significant decrease in performance compared with previously reported results on its original testing dataset (mean DSC = 0.84), which shared the same distribution as the training dataset. For esophagus segmentation, evaluation of 26 scans from 6 patients showed that the model achieved geometric accuracy within peri-target contour rings comparable to rigid propagation, with mean DSC of 0.72 and 0.70, respectively. Similar esophagus V32Gy values were observed between the model-generated and reference contours (0.06 vs 0.06 cc). Significantly reduced accuracy was observed compared with previously reported results, with mean DSC decreasing from 0.79 to 0.72. These findings highlight that DL-based CBCT auto-segmentation may suffer performance degradation under domain shifts across patient populations, clinical workflows, and imaging systems, emphasizing the necessity of external evaluation beyond the original development environment.
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.