ArticleCancers2025
A Preliminary Study on Deep Learning-Based Plan Quality Prediction in Gamma Knife Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases.
Article in Cancers, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesGK plan quality is strongly affected by lesion size and shape, and the same evaluation metrics may not be directly comparable across patients with different anatomies. This study proposes a deep learning-based method to predict achievable, clinically acceptable plan quality from patient-specific geometry.
methodsA hierarchically densely connected U-Net (HD-U-Net) was trained at the lesion level to predict 3D dose distributions for the estimation of plan quality metrics, including coverage, selectivity, gradient index (GI), and conformity index at a 50% prescription dose (CI50). To improve the prediction accuracy of plan quality metrics, Dice similarity coefficient losses for the 100% and 50% isodose lines were incorporated with conventional mean squared error (MSE) loss.
resultsTen-fold cross-validation on 463 brain metastases (BMs) from 175 patients showed that our method achieved smaller mean absolute errors across all four metrics than the HD-U-Net baseline trained with MSE loss. Improvements were pronounced in all metrics for small metastases, and were observed primarily in GI and CI50 for medium and large lesions. Paired Wilcoxon signed-rank tests confirmed the statistical significance of these improvements (
conclusionsThe proposed method outperformed the baseline model in capturing overall trends, improving per-lesion accuracy, and enhancing robustness to dataset variability. It can serve as a pre-planning tool to guide planners in constraint setting and priority tuning, a post-planning quality control tool to identify subpar plans that could be substantially improved, and as a foundation for developing deep reinforcement learning-based automated planning of GK treatments for brain metastases.
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.