Artificial Intelligence in Radiation Oncology: A Specialty-wide Disruptive Transformation?

Overview

Journal Radiother Oncol

Specialties Oncology
Radiology

Date 2018 Jun 17

PMID 29907338

Citations 80

Authors

Reid F Thompson

Gilmer Valdes

Clifton D Fuller

Colin M Carpenter

Olivier Morin

Sanjay Aneja

William D Lindsay

Hugo J W L Aerts

Barbara Agrimson

Curtiland Deville Jr

Seth A Rosenthal

James B Yu

Charles R Thomas Jr

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging as a technology with the power to transform established industries, and with applications from automated manufacturing to advertising and facial recognition to fully autonomous transportation. Advances in each of these domains have led some to call AI the "fourth" industrial revolution [1]. In healthcare, AI is emerging as both a productive and disruptive force across many disciplines. This is perhaps most evident in Diagnostic Radiology and Pathology, specialties largely built around the processing and complex interpretation of medical images, where the role of AI is increasingly seen as both a boon and a threat. In Radiation Oncology as well, AI seems poised to reshape the specialty in significant ways, though the impact of AI has been relatively limited at present, and may rightly seem more distant to many, given the predominantly interpersonal and complex interventional nature of the specialty. In this overview, we will explore the current state and anticipated future impact of AI on Radiation Oncology, in detail, focusing on key topics from multiple stakeholder perspectives, as well as the role our specialty may play in helping to shape the future of AI within the larger spectrum of medicine.

Citing Articles

Radiation therapists' perspectives on artificial intelligence: Insights from a single institution on Improving effectiveness and educational supports.

Marr C, Tsang Y Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2025; 33:100300.

PMID: 39896145 PMC: 11782823. DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2025.100300.

Artificial intelligence for chimeric antigen receptor-based therapies: a comprehensive review of current applications and future perspectives.

Shahzadi M, Rafique H, Waheed A, Naz H, Waheed A, Zokirova F Ther Adv Vaccines Immunother. 2024; 12:25151355241305856.

PMID: 39691280 PMC: 11650588. DOI: 10.1177/25151355241305856.

A bibliometrics analysis based on the application of artificial intelligence in the field of radiotherapy from 2003 to 2023.

Lv M, Feng Y, Zeng S, Zhang Y, Shen W, Guan W Radiat Oncol. 2024; 19(1):157.

PMID: 39529129 PMC: 11552138. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-024-02551-1.

Knowledge-based planning, multicriteria optimization, and plan scorecards: A winning combination.

Cardenas C, Cardan R, Harms J, Simiele E, Popple R Radiother Oncol. 2024; 202:110598.

PMID: 39490417 PMC: 11663123. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110598.

A Short Review on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Diagnosis Diseases: Role of Radiomics In Neuro-Oncology.

Rahimi M, Rahimi P Galen Med J. 2024; 12:e3158.

PMID: 39464540 PMC: 11512432. DOI: 10.31661/gmj.v12i.3158.

References

Chang A, Hung A, Cheung F, Lee M, Chan O, Philips H . Comparison of Planning Quality and Efficiency Between Conventional and Knowledge-based Algorithms in Nasopharyngeal Cancer Patients Using Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 95(3):981-990. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.017. View

Good D, Lo J, Lee W, Wu Q, Yin F, Das S . A knowledge-based approach to improving and homogenizing intensity modulated radiation therapy planning quality among treatment centers: an example application to prostate cancer planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 87(1):176-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.03.015. View

Skripcak T, Belka C, Bosch W, Brink C, Brunner T, Budach V . Creating a data exchange strategy for radiotherapy research: towards federated databases and anonymised public datasets. Radiother Oncol. 2014; 113(3):303-9. PMC: 4648243. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2014.10.001. View

. Matched computed tomography segmentation and demographic data for oropharyngeal cancer radiomics challenges. Sci Data. 2017; 4:170077. PMC: 5497772. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2017.77. View

El Naqa I, Deasy J, Mu Y, Huang E, Hope A, Lindsay P . Datamining approaches for modeling tumor control probability. Acta Oncol. 2010; 49(8):1363-73. PMC: 4786027. DOI: 10.3109/02841861003649224. View

Oberije C, Nalbantov G, Dekker A, Boersma L, Borger J, Reymen B . A prospective study comparing the predictions of doctors versus models for treatment outcome of lung cancer patients: a step toward individualized care and shared decision making. Radiother Oncol. 2014; 112(1):37-43. PMC: 4886657. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2014.04.012. View

Moore K, Schmidt R, Moiseenko V, Olsen L, Tan J, Xiao Y . Quantifying Unnecessary Normal Tissue Complication Risks due to Suboptimal Planning: A Secondary Study of RTOG 0126. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015; 92(2):228-35. PMC: 4431941. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.01.046. View

El Naqa I, Suneja G, Lindsay P, Hope A, Alaly J, Vicic M . Dose response explorer: an integrated open-source tool for exploring and modelling radiotherapy dose-volume outcome relationships. Phys Med Biol. 2006; 51(22):5719-35. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/51/22/001. View

Bertagnolli M, Sartor O, Chabner B, Rothenberg M, Khozin S, Hugh-Jones C . Advantages of a Truly Open-Access Data-Sharing Model. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(12):1178-1181. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsb1702054. View

10.

Delpon G, Escande A, Ruef T, Darreon J, Fontaine J, Noblet C . Comparison of Automated Atlas-Based Segmentation Software for Postoperative Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy. Front Oncol. 2016; 6:178. PMC: 4971890. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2016.00178. View

11.

Hope A, Lindsay P, El Naqa I, Alaly J, Vicic M, Bradley J . Modeling radiation pneumonitis risk with clinical, dosimetric, and spatial parameters. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65(1):112-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.11.046. View

12.

Smith B, Haffty B, Wilson L, Smith G, Patel A, Buchholz T . The future of radiation oncology in the United States from 2010 to 2020: will supply keep pace with demand?. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(35):5160-5. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.2520. View

13.

Hill S . Data sharing: guard the privacy of donors. Nature. 2017; 548(7667):281. DOI: 10.1038/548281a. View

14.

Lim-Reinders S, Keller B, Al-Ward S, Sahgal A, Kim A . Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017; 99(4):994-1003. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.04.023. View

15.

Jepsen P, Johnsen S, Gillman M, Sorensen H . Interpretation of observational studies. Heart. 2004; 90(8):956-60. PMC: 1768356. DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2003.017269. View

16.

Rumbold J, Pierscionek B . The Effect of the General Data Protection Regulation on Medical Research. J Med Internet Res. 2017; 19(2):e47. PMC: 5346164. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.7108. View

17.

Latifi K, Oliver J, Baker R, Dilling T, Stevens C, Kim J . Study of 201 non-small cell lung cancer patients given stereotactic ablative radiation therapy shows local control dependence on dose calculation algorithm. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 88(5):1108-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.12.047. View

18.

Foy J, Marsh R, Ten Haken R, Younge K, Schipper M, Sun Y . An analysis of knowledge-based planning for stereotactic body radiation therapy of the spine. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2017; 7(5):e355-e360. DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2017.02.007. View

19.

Kalpathy-Cramer J, Freymann J, Kirby J, Kinahan P, Prior F . Quantitative Imaging Network: Data Sharing and Competitive AlgorithmValidation Leveraging The Cancer Imaging Archive. Transl Oncol. 2014; 7(1):147-52. PMC: 3998686. DOI: 10.1593/tlo.13862. View

20.

Zhang L, Fried D, Fave X, Hunter L, Yang J, Court L . IBEX: an open infrastructure software platform to facilitate collaborative work in radiomics. Med Phys. 2015; 42(3):1341-53. PMC: 5148126. DOI: 10.1118/1.4908210. View