ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
A deep learning-based dose calculation method for volumetric modulated arc therapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A multi-centre evaluation of deep learning based radiotherapy planning for left-sided node-negative breast cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVolumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning optimization involves iterative adjustment of numerous parameters, and hence requires repeatedly dose recalculation. In this study, we used the deep learning method to develop a fast and accurate dose calculation method for VMAT.
methodsThe classical 3D UNet was adopted and trained to learn the physics principle of dose calculation. The inputs included the projected fluence map (FM), computed tomography (CT) images, the radiological depth and the source-to-voxel distance (SVD). The projected FM was generated by projecting the accumulated FM between two consecutive control points (CPs) onto the patient's anatomy. The accumulated FM was calculated by simulating the movement of the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) from one CP to the next. The dose, calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS), was used as ground truth. 51 head and neck VMAT plans were used, with 43, 1 and 7 cases as training, validation, and testing datasets, respectively. Correspondingly, 7182, 180 and 1260 CP samples were included in the training, validation, and testing datasets.
resultsThis presented method was evaluated by comparing the derived dose distribution to the TPS calculated dose distribution. The dose profiles coincided for both the single CP and the entire plan (summation of all CPs). But the network derived dose was smoother than the TPS calculated dose. Gamma analysis was performed between the network derived dose and the TPS calculated dose. The average gamma pass rate was 96.56%, 98.75%, 98.03% and 99.30% under the criteria of 2% (tolerance) -2 mm (distance to agreement, DTA). 2%-3 mm, 3%-2 mm and 3%-3 mm. No significant difference was observed on the critical indices including the max, mean dose, and the relative volume covered by the 2000 cGy, 4000 cGy and the prescription dose. For one CP, the average computational time of the network and TPS was 0.09s and 0.53s. And for one patient, the average time was 16.51s and 95.60s.
conclusionThe dose distribution derived by the network showed good agreement with the TPS calculated dose distribution. The computational time was reduced to approximate one-sixth of its original duration. Therefore the presented deep learning-based dose calculation method has the potential to be used for planning optimization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.