AI for Doctors / Practical / Oncology (medical + radiation)

AI in Oncology (medical + radiation)

In radiation oncology, auto-contouring and AI-assisted planning are the most mature uses, and professional bodies have published guidance for them. In medical oncology, AI for pathology, imaging and trial matching is growing, while outcome prediction models are mostly still research.

What AI does in Oncology (medical + radiation)

Auto-contouring for radiotherapyroutine

Draws organs at risk for head and neck, pelvis and other sites. Needs commissioning and checks.

Examples: Commercial contouring tools; TotalSegmentator for research

AI-assisted treatment planningearly adoption

Predicts dose and speeds plan generation.

Examples: Vendor planning tools

Adaptive radiotherapyearly adoption

Rapid re-contouring and re-planning on the day.

Examples: Vendor adaptive platforms

Pathology and imaging support in cancer diagnosisearly adoption

AI reads slides and scans that feed oncology decisions.

Examples: See radiology and pathology pages

Clinical trial matchingearly adoption

Finds eligible patients from records.

Examples: Hospital and vendor tools

Prognosis and response predictionresearch

Models using imaging, pathology and genomics predict outcome.

Examples: Multimodal research models

routine = in everyday use in many centres · early adoption = in use at some sites, evidence still building · research = studies only

Key ideas for this specialty

Auto-contouring: Software draws the outlines of organs at risk and sometimes tumour on the planning scan. The oncologist edits and approves.
AI-assisted planning: Models predict achievable dose and suggest a plan so planning is faster and more consistent.
Adaptive radiotherapy: The plan is changed during treatment based on the anatomy that day. AI speeds up the re-contouring and re-planning.
Radiomics: Many numeric features pulled from scans to predict response or prognosis.
Clinical trial matching: Software reads the patient record and lists trials the patient may fit.

New to the basics? Start with the theory lessons.

Tools

Open-source organ segmentation on CT and MRI, used in research for contouring.

Regulatory status: Not listed

Open segmentation framework behind many research contouring models.

Regulatory status: Not listed

Free cancer imaging datasets.

Regulatory status: Not listed

Free portal to explore cancer genomics data.

Regulatory status: Not listed

QuPathfree

Free open-source pathology image analysis.

Regulatory status: Not listed

A listing here is not an endorsement. Ask any vendor for its CDSCO licence and class before clinical use.

Where to learn

Royal College of Radiologistsguidelinefreeintermediate

Consensus advice on selecting, commissioning and monitoring auto-contouring.

NCI-funded archivearticlefreeintermediate

Practice data for oncology imaging projects.

Cancer CellarticleNot listedbeginner

Review across the cancer pathway.

Nature Reviews Clinical OncologyarticleNot listedintermediate

Links pathology AI to treatment choice.

Nature MedicinearticleNot listedadvanced

Combining imaging, pathology and genomics.

DeepLearning.AI on CourseracourseNot listedintermediate

Covers prognosis and imaging models.

Do it yourself

Segment a planning CT with TotalSegmentator

Run TotalSegmentator on a public CT from TCIA. Compare the organ outlines with what you would draw and note edits needed.

Open the dataset or tool →
Explore a cancer genomics cohort

Open a study in cBioPortal, plot survival by a mutation, and note the sample size and missing data.

Open the dataset or tool →

Use public or properly de-identified data only, and get ethics approval before any project on your own patients.

Papers worth reading

Societies and guidance

Auto-contouring guidance (2024).

European radiotherapy society; has AI education and guidance material.

Recent updates

30 Jan 2026
Evidence

Lancet: full MASAI results show AI-supported mammography screening lowered interval cancers by 12%

In the Swedish randomised trial of over 100,000 women, AI-supported screening cut interval cancer diagnoses by 12% with similar false positives (1.5% vs 1.4%). It also found 16% fewer invasive and 27% fewer aggressive-subtype cancers between screens.

Source: ecancer
All updates →

Links checked 3 October 2026. “Not listed” means we could not confirm the detail, not that it is absent. Educational material, not clinical advice.