The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automatic treatment planning based on three‐dimensional dose distribution predicted from deep learning technique
Abstract
Purpose: To develop an automated treatment planning strategy for external beam intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), including a deep learning‐based three‐dimensional (3D) dose prediction and a dose distribution‐based plan generation algorithm. Methods and Materials: A residual neural network‐based deep learning model is trained to predict a dose distribution based on patient‐specific geometry and prescription dose. A total of 270 head‐and‐neck cancer cases were enrolled in this study, including 195 cases in the training dataset, 25 cases in the validation dataset, and 50 cases in the testing dataset. All patients were treated with IMRT with a variety of different prescription patterns. The model input consists of CT images and contours delineating the organs at risk (OAR s) and planning target volumes (PTV s). The algorithm output is trained to predict the dose distribution on the CT image slices. The obtained prediction model is used to predict dose distributions for new patients. Then, an optimization objective function based on these predicted dose distributions is created for automatic plan generation. Results: Our results demonstrate that the deep learning method can predict clinically acceptable dose distributions. There is no statistically significant difference between prediction and real clinical plan for all clinically relevant dose–volume histogram (DVH) indices, except brainstem, right and left lens. However, the predicted plans were still clinically acceptable. The results of plan generation show no statistically significant differences between the automatic generated plan and the predicted plan except PTV70.4, but the difference is only 0.5% which is still clinically acceptable. Conclusion: This study developed a new automated radiotherapy treatment planning system based on 3D dose prediction and 3D dose distribution‐based optimization. It is a promising approach for realizing automated treatment planning in the future.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge
Russakovsky, O., Deng, J., Su, H., Krause, J., Satheesh, S., Ma, S., Huang, Z., Karpathy, A., Khosla, A., Bernstein, M., et al. (2015) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y · Cited by 39,380
(2014) · Cited by 33,419
The NumPy Array: A Structure for Efficient Numerical Computation
van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. (2011) · Computing in Science & Engineering · doi:10.1109/mcse.2011.37 · Cited by 9,381
(2011) · Cited by 6,993
SCHROEDER, W. J., & MARTIN, K. M. (2005) · Visualization Handbook · doi:10.1016/b978-012387582-2/50032-0 · Cited by 1,355
Mao, X.-J., Shen, C., & Yang, Y.-B. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1603.09056 · Cited by 1,263
Development of the open-source dose calculation and optimization toolkit matRad
Wieser, H.-P., Cisternas, E., Wahl, N., Ulrich, S., Stadler, A., Mescher, H., Müller, L.-R., Klinge, T., Gabrys, H., Burigo, L., et al. (2017) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/mp.12251 · Cited by 325
Evaluation of a Knowledge-Based Planning Solution for Head and Neck Cancer
Tol, J. P., Delaney, A. R., Dahele, M., Slotman, B. J., & Verbakel, W. F. A. R. (2015) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.11.014 · Cited by 279
Shiraishi, S., & Moore, K. L. (2015) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.4938583 · Cited by 237
Chang, A. T. Y., Hung, A. W. M., Cheung, F. W. K., Lee, M. C. H., Chan, O. S. H., Philips, H., Cheng, Y.-T., & Ng, W. T. (2016) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.017 · Cited by 153
Moore, K. L., Schmidt, R., Moiseenko, V., Olsen, L. A., Tan, J., Xiao, Y., Galvin, J. M., Pugh, S. L., Seider, M. J., Dicker, A. P., et al. (2015) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.01.046 · Cited by 146
Data augmentation for face recognition
Lv, J.-J., Shao, X., Huang, J., Zhou, X., & Zhou, X. (2016) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2016.12.025 · Cited by 134
Tribius, S., & Bergelt, C. (2011) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2011.01.004 · Cited by 118
Fan, J., Wang, J., Zhang, Z., & Hu, W. (2017) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/mp.12232 · Cited by 40
Self-citationZieminski, S., Khandekar, M. J., & Wang, Y. (2018) · Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/acm2.12277 · Cited by 30
Cited by
Paired cycle‐GAN‐based image correction for quantitative cone‐beam computed tomography
Harms, J., Lei, Y., Wang, T., Zhang, R., Zhou, J., Tang, X., Curran, W. J., Liu, T., & Yang, X. (2019) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/mp.13656 · Cited by 257
Reinforcement learning for clinical decision support in critical care: comprehensive review
Liu, S., See, K. C., Ngiam, K. Y., Celi, L. A., Sun, X., & Feng, M. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/18477 · Cited by 225
Barragán-Montero, A. M., Thomas, M., Defraene, G., Michiels, S., Haustermans, K., Lee, J. A., & Sterpin, E. (2021) · Physica Medica · doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.02.026 · Cited by 69
Artificial intelligence in radiotherapy
Li, G., Wu, X., & Ma, X. (2022) · Seminars in Cancer Biology · doi:10.1016/j.semcancer.2022.08.005 · Cited by 46
A Survey on Deep Learning for Precision Oncology
Wang, C.-W., Khalil, M.-A., & Firdi, N. (2022) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics12061489 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Fan, J., Wang, J., Chen, Z., Hu, C., Zhang, Z., & Hu, W.
- Venue
- Medical Physics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-11-28
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 370-381
- ISSN
- 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
- 2473-4209
- OpenAlex
- W2898757811
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 27.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
