Now at SIIM 2026 · Startup Kiosk 3 · June 10–12

Case study · Mayo Clinic Arizona · Radiation Oncology

Mayo Clinic Arizona — when the vendor model isn't enough

Vendor auto-contouring models underperformed on Mayo Arizona's prostate protocol (iodinated spacers, rectal balloons). The team retrained INTContour on 100 local cases. Blinded review by 6 GU radiation oncologists found AI contours rated ≥ manual in ≥50% of cases across every structure.

The setting

Mayo Clinic Arizona’s prostate planning protocol uses anatomy that almost no vendor’s auto-segmentation model has seen during training: iodinated rectal spacers and rectal balloons. The shape and contrast of male pelvis structures changes substantially.

Three major vendors’ built-in deep-learning auto-segmentation models were evaluated. All three underperformed on the Mayo protocol — particularly on prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder, rectum, and femur heads.

The intervention

Rather than tune around vendor limitations, Mayo’s team used INTContour’s incremental retraining capability. They trained a new model on 100 locally-acquired cases that included the spacer and balloon configurations.

INTContour’s incremental learning runs entirely within the institution. No data leaves. No code is written — the training pipeline is part of the platform.

The readout

Mayo conducted a blinded 5-point clinical-acceptability rating on 115 test cases, scored by 6 GU radiation oncologists plus 2 RO residents.

The headline finding:

AI contours rated ≥ manual contours in ≥50% of cases — across every structure tested.

Per-structure detail (lowest to highest acceptance):

StructureAI ≥ manual rating
Seminal vesicles70%
Penile bulb73%
Prostate78%
Rectum82%
Femur heads88%
Bladder95%

The lowest acceptance rate (seminal vesicles in junior-resident review, 63.8%) still clears the 50% threshold. The highest (bladder, RO1 review) is 100%.

The point

This is what “research today, FDA-cleared product tomorrow” looks like in practice. Mayo retrained the same FDA-cleared INTContour engine on the protocol their clinic actually uses — without writing code, without exporting data, without procuring a new vendor.

It’s also the strongest evidence we have for the platform claim: when the vendor model doesn’t fit the local protocol, incremental retraining inside the same platform closes the gap.

Reference

Duan J, Vargas CE, Yu NY, Laughlin BS, … Feng X, Chen Q, Rong Y. Incremental retraining, clinical implementation, and acceptance rate of deep learning auto-segmentation for male pelvis in a multiuser environment. Medical Physics, 2023.

Follow-up study published as Duan et al., Radiotherapy & Oncology, 2025 — CT-only prostate auto-segmentation without MR.

See INTContour →