Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42840821›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026

An interactive virtual dosimetrist for adjusting radiotherapy dose quality.

Skylar S Gay, Tucker J Netherton, Barbara Marquez, Raymond Mumme, Mary Gronberg, Brent Parker, Chelsea Pinnix, Sanjay Shete, Carlos E Cardenas, Laurence E Court

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation 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

10 authors.

Skylar S GayThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, United States of America.
Tucker J NethertonDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America.
Barbara MarquezDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America.
Raymond MummeDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America.
Mary GronbergDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States of America.
Brent ParkerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, TX, United States of America.
Chelsea PinnixDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America.
Sanjay SheteDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America.
Carlos E CardenasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States of America.
Laurence E CourtDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States of America.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Effective education in radiotherapy plan quality review requires exposure to treatment plans of varying quality and opportunities for plan improvements. However, the current clinic-based paradigm does not fully support these needs. Trainees often review limited numbers of diverse treatment plans and are not fully exposed to the planning decisions essential for developing strong evaluation skills. Materials and Methods: To address these challenges, we developed "Virtual Dosimetrist" models that generate and modify radiotherapy dose distributions through language conditioning, similar to communicating with a planner during plan review. This enables creation of diverse suboptimal examples and real-time, language-guided refinement. Results: The models modify dose distributions following language directives, allowing the generation of lower-quality examples and subsequent improvement. Dose predictions were produced quickly and without reliance on a planning system, enabling interactive adjustment that mirrors the clinical review-edit cycle. For the 11 patients in the test set, good control over the extent and magnitude of dose changes across 17 OOIs, together with robustness to variations in the language directives, was observed. When comparing to dose originating from a TPS, median RMSE was 52 cGy across all dose-level comparisons and 98% of predictions met the prespecified equivalence criterion of RMSE Conclusions: This work is the first to combine deep learning-based dose prediction with natural language processing specifically designed to support the language-conditioned generation of suboptimal dose distributions and their improvement. The framework could be used as a foundation for educational applications, such as replicating plan quality review in an interactive environment.

Indexed as

Dose predictionNatural language processingRadiotherapy plan qualityText conditioning

Identifiers

PMID42840821
PMCPMC13639743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.