Prospective blinded clinical evaluation of a fully automated workflow for prostate radiotherapy

Fully automated workflows integrating deep learning-based segmentation and treatment planning have shown promising results in research settings but require prospective evaluation under routine clinical conditions. This study assessed the clinical usability of a fully automated workflow for prostate radiotherapy compared with the conventional clinical workflow.

Twenty-two consecutively treated patients undergoing prostate radiotherapy were included. For each patient, treatment planning was first performed according to the conventional workflow, followed by execution of a fully automated workflow combining deep learning-based segmentation and planning models within a commercial treatment planning system. Plans and structure sets were evaluated in a blinded, standardized manner by board-certified radiation oncologists and rated as "good", "acceptable", or "unacceptable". The preferred plan was selected for treatment. Processing times were recorded.

Clinically acceptable results were achieved in 86% of fully automated cases compared with 95% in the conventional workflow. Conventional plans were rated more frequently as "good" (17/22 vs 12/22), mainly due to differences in target delineation. Fully automated clinical target volumes were consistently smaller (median 54.2 cm³ vs 68.3 cm³; p < 0.001). The fully automated workflow required a median of 9 min (range 8-10) compared with 87 min (range 70-130) for the conventional workflow.

A fully automated workflow for prostate radiotherapy substantially reduces workload and processing time while achieving a high rate of clinical acceptability. Implementation as a draft-first approach with mandatory physician review appears feasible, although refinement of automated target delineation is warranted.