The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Knowledge-based prediction of three-dimensional dose distributions for external beam radiotherapy: Knowledge-based prediction of 3D dose distributions
Abstract
PURPOSE: To demonstrate knowledge-based 3D dose prediction for external beam radiotherapy. METHODS: Using previously treated plans as training data, an artificial neural network (ANN) was trained to predict a dose matrix based on patient-specific geometric and planning parameters, such as the closest distance (r) to planning target volume (PTV) and organ-at-risks (OARs). Twenty-three prostate and 43 stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy (SRS/SRT) cases with at least one nearby OAR were studied. All were planned with volumetric-modulated arc therapy to prescription doses of 81 Gy for prostate and 12-30 Gy for SRS. Using these clinically approved plans, ANNs were trained to predict dose matrix and the predictive accuracy was evaluated using the dose difference between the clinical plan and prediction, δD = Dclin - Dpred. The mean (〈δDr〉), standard deviation (σδDr ), and their interquartile range (IQR) for the training plans were evaluated at a 2-3 mm interval from the PTV boundary (rPTV) to assess prediction bias and precision. Initially, unfiltered models which were trained using all plans in the cohorts were created for each treatment site. The models predict approximately the average quality of OAR sparing. Emphasizing a subset of plans that exhibited superior to the average OAR sparing during training, refined models were created to predict high-quality rectum sparing for prostate and brainstem sparing for SRS. Using the refined model, potentially suboptimal plans were identified where the model predicted further sparing of the OARs was achievable. Replans were performed to test if the OAR sparing could be improved as predicted by the model. RESULTS: The refined models demonstrated highly accurate dose distribution prediction. For prostate cases, the average prediction bias for all voxels irrespective of organ delineation ranged from -1% to 0% with maximum IQR of 3% over rPTV ∈ [ - 6, 30] mm. The average prediction error was less than 10% for the same rPTV range. For SRS cases, the average prediction bias ranged from -0.7% to 1.5% with maximum IQR of 5% over rPTV ∈ [ - 4, 32] mm. The average prediction error was less than 8%. Four potentially suboptimal plans were identified for each site and subsequent replanning demonstrated improved sparing of rectum and brainstem. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates highly accurate knowledge-based 3D dose predictions for radiotherapy plans.
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
Cited by
Fan, J., Wang, J., Chen, Z., Hu, C., Zhang, Z., & Hu, W. (2019) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/mp.13271 · Cited by 353
A feasibility study of automating radiotherapy planning with large language model agents
Wang, Q., Wang, Z., Li, M., Ni, X., Tan, R., Zhang, W., Wubulaishan, M., Wang, W., Yuan, Z., Zhang, Z., et al. (2025) · Physics in Medicine & Biology · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/adbff1 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Shiraishi, S., & Moore, K. L.
- Venue
- Medical Physics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-12-29
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 378-387
- ISSN
- 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2196898084
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.71
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Knowledge-based prediction of three-dimensional dose distributions for external beam radiotherapy: Knowledge-based prediction of 3D dose distributions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1118/1.4938583
- The paper
- Shiraishi, S., & Moore, K. L. (2015). Knowledge-based prediction of three-dimensional dose distributions for external beam radiotherapy: Knowledge-based prediction of 3D dose distributions. Medical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4938583
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.