ESTRO 2025 - Abstract Book

S2309

Interdisciplinary – Health economics & health services research

ESTRO 2025

Staff interviews highlighted that departments using AI were able to perform additional activities by redeploying the time saved, and staff reported improved work-life balance and satisfaction with AI tools. Acceptability of the contours varied across tumour sites, with no or minor edits required for 100% breast cases versus 66.1% no or minor edits for head and neck contours. Good acceptability is important for shorter review times and standardising between staff and departments. Manual contouring pathways require oncologists for both contouring (86% cases) and reviewing (100% cases). On the AI pathway, contour review was distributed across dosimetrists (44%), radiographers (15%) and oncologists (39%) which was a significant driver of cost saving. The health economic evaluation showed that AI contouring resulted in substantial cost savings versus manual contouring, although costs savings varied considerably according to the primary tumour site.