Frontiers in Oncology,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
14
Published: July 11, 2024
Purpose
To
evaluate
organ
at
risk
(OAR)
auto-segmentation
in
the
head
and
neck
region
of
computed
tomography
images
using
two
different
commercially
available
deep-learning-based
(DLAS)
tools
a
single
institutional
clinical
applications.
Methods
Twenty-two
OARs
were
manually
contoured
by
clinicians
according
to
published
guidelines
on
planning
(pCT)
for
40
cancer
(HNC)
cases.
Automatic
contours
generated
each
patient
models—Manteia
AccuContour
MIM
ProtégéAI.
The
accuracy
integrity
autocontours
(ACs)
then
compared
expert
(ECs)
Sørensen-Dice
similarity
coefficient
(DSC)
Mean
Distance
(MD)
metrics.
Results
ACs
22
17
ProtégéAI
with
average
contour
generation
time
1
min/patient
5
respectively.
EC
AC
agreement
was
highest
mandible
(DSC
0.90
±
0.16)
0.91
0.03),
lowest
chiasm
0.28
0.14)
0.30
Using
AccuContour,
MD
was<1mm
10
contoured,
1-2mm
6
OARs,
2-3mm
OARs.
For
ProtégéAI,
mean
distance
8
out
3
Conclusions
Both
DLAS
programs
proven
be
valuable
significantly
reduce
required
generate
large
amounts
OAR
region,
even
though
manual
editing
is
likely
needed
prior
implementation
into
treatment
planning.
DSCs
MDs
achieved
similar
those
reported
other
studies
that
evaluated
various
solutions.
Still,
small
volume
structures
nonideal
contrast
CT
images,
such
as
nerves,
are
very
challenging
will
require
additional
solutions
achieve
sufficient
results.
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
unknown
Published: Aug. 6, 2024
Abstract
The
rapid
development
of
artificial
intelligence
(AI)
has
gained
importance,
with
many
tools
already
entering
our
daily
lives.
medical
field
radiation
oncology
is
also
subject
to
this
development,
AI
all
steps
the
patient
journey.
In
review
article,
we
summarize
contemporary
techniques
and
explore
clinical
applications
AI-based
automated
segmentation
models
in
radiotherapy
planning,
focusing
on
delineation
organs
at
risk
(OARs),
gross
tumor
volume
(GTV),
target
(CTV).
Emphasizing
need
for
precise
individualized
plans,
various
commercial
freeware
state-of-the-art
approaches.
Through
own
findings
based
literature,
demonstrate
improved
efficiency
consistency
as
well
time
savings
different
scenarios.
Despite
challenges
implementation
such
domain
shifts,
potential
benefits
personalized
treatment
planning
are
substantial.
integration
mathematical
growth
detection
further
enhances
possibilities
refining
volumes.
As
advancements
continue,
prospect
one-stop-shop
represents
an
exciting
frontier
radiotherapy,
potentially
enabling
fast
enhanced
precision
individualization.
Medical Physics,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
51(3), P. 1536 - 1546
Published: Jan. 17, 2024
Abstract
Background
Daily
CTs
generated
by
CBCT
correction
are
required
for
daily
replanning
in
online‐adaptive
proton
therapy
(APT)
to
effectively
deal
with
inter‐fractional
changes.
Out
of
the
currently
available
methods,
suitability
a
CT
generation
method
dose
calculation
also
depends
on
anatomical
site.
Purpose
We
propose
an
anatomy‐preserving
virtual
(APvCT)
as
hybrid
correction,
which
is
especially
suitable
large
anatomy
deformations.
The
accuracy
was
assessed
comparison
corrected
(cCBCT)
and
(vCT)
methods
context
online
APT.
Methods
Seventy‐one
CBCTs
four
prostate
cancer
patients
treated
intensity
modulated
(IMPT)
were
converted
using
cCBCT,
vCT,
newly
proposed
APvCT
method.
In
APvCT,
planning
(pCT)
mapped
geometry
deformable
image
registration
boundary
conditions
controlling
regions
interest
(ROIs)
created
deep
learning
segmentation
cCBCT.
relative
frequency
distribution
(RFD)
HU,
mass
density
stopping
power
ratio
(SPR)
values
compared
pCT.
ROIs
vCT
cCBCT
terms
Dice
similarity
coefficient
(DSC)
mean
distance‐to‐agreement
(mDTA).
For
each
patient,
robustly
optimized
IMPT
plan
pCT
subsequent
adaptive
plans
CTs.
same
anatomy,
recalculated
corresponding
APvCT.
distributions
isodose
volumes
3D
global
gamma‐index
passing
rate
(GPR)
at
γ(2%,
2
mm)
criterion.
Results
all
patients,
no
noticeable
difference
RFDs
observed
amongst
except
showed
difference.
minimum
DSC
value
0.96
0.39
contours
respectively.
average
mDTA
0.01
cm
clinical
target
volume
≤0.01
organs
risk,
increased
0.18
≤0.52
vCT.
GPR
90.9%,
64.5%,
67.0%
versus
When
resulted
GPRs
89.5
±
5.1%
65.9
19.1%,
80.0%,
90.0%,
95.0%,
98.0%,
100.0%
0.97,
0.95,
0.91
plans,
0.89,
0.88,
0.87,
0.85,
0.81
plans.
Hausdorff
distance
some
cases
exceeded
1.00
cm.
Conclusions
good
agreement
reference
indicates
preservation
A
erroneous
can
result
incorrect
plan.
Further,
slightly
lower
between
cCBCT‐based
be
explained
cCBCT's
SPR
RFD
from
British Journal of Radiology,
Journal Year:
2023,
Volume and Issue:
97(1153), P. 13 - 20
Published: Dec. 12, 2023
The
segmentation
of
organs
and
structures
is
a
critical
component
radiation
therapy
planning,
with
manual
being
laborious
time-consuming
task.
Interobserver
variability
can
also
impact
the
outcomes
therapy.
Deep
neural
networks
have
recently
gained
attention
for
their
ability
to
automate
tasks,
convolutional
(CNNs)
popular
approach.
This
article
provides
descriptive
review
literature
on
deep
learning
(DL)
techniques
in
planning.
focuses
five
clinical
sub-sites
finds
that
U-net
most
commonly
used
CNN
architecture.
studies
using
DL
image
were
included
brain,
head
neck,
lung,
abdominal,
pelvic
cancers.
majority
articles
planning
concentrated
normal
tissue
structures.
N-fold
cross-validation
was
employed,
without
external
validation.
research
area
expanding
quickly,
standardization
metrics
independent
validation
are
benchmarking
comparing
proposed
methods.
Radiation Oncology,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
19(1)
Published: Aug. 7, 2024
Abstract
Purpose
Convolutional
Neural
Networks
(CNNs)
have
emerged
as
transformative
tools
in
the
field
of
radiation
oncology,
significantly
advancing
precision
contouring
practices.
However,
adaptability
these
algorithms
across
diverse
scanners,
institutions,
and
imaging
protocols
remains
a
considerable
obstacle.
This
study
aims
to
investigate
effects
incorporating
institution-specific
datasets
into
training
regimen
CNNs
assess
their
generalization
ability
real-world
clinical
environments.
Focusing
on
data-centric
analysis,
influence
varying
multi-
single
center
approaches
algorithm
performance
is
conducted.
Methods
nnU-Net
trained
using
dataset
comprising
161
18
F-PSMA-1007
PET
images
collected
from
four
distinct
institutions
(Freiburg:
n
=
96,
Munich:
19,
Cyprus:
32,
Dresden:
14).
The
partitioned
such
that
data
each
are
systematically
excluded
used
solely
for
testing
model's
generalizability
unfamiliar
sources.
Performance
compared
through
5-Fold
Cross-Validation,
providing
detailed
comparison
between
models
centers
those
aggregated
multi-center
datasets.
Dice
Similarity
Score,
Hausdorff
distance
volumetric
analysis
primary
evaluation
metrics.
Results
mixed
approach
yielded
median
DSC
0.76
(IQR:
0.64–0.84)
five-fold
cross-validation,
showing
no
significant
differences
(p
0.18)
with
exclusion
center,
which
performed
0.74
0.56–0.86).
Significant
improvements
regarding
were
observed
Dresden
cohort
(multi-center
0.71,
IQR:
0.58–0.80
vs.
single-center
0.68,
0.50–0.80,
p
<
0.001)
Cyprus
0.74,
0.62–0.83
0.72,
0.54–0.82,
0.01).
While
Munich
Freiburg
also
showed
training,
results
statistical
significance
(Munich:
0.60–0.80
0.59–0.82,
>
0.05;
Freiburg:
0.78,
0.53–0.87
0.53–0.83,
0.23).
Conclusion
auto
intraprostatic
GTV
multiple
mostly
generalize
well
unseen
other
centers.
Training
multicentric
can
improve
exclusively
segmentation.
segmentation
same
CNN
vary
depending
employed
testing.
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
31, P. 100627 - 100627
Published: July 1, 2024
Advancements
in
radiotherapy
auto-segmentation
necessitate
reliable
and
efficient
workflows.
Therefore,
a
standardized
fully
automatic
workflow
was
developed
for
three
commercially
available
deep
learning-based
applications
compared
to
manual
safety
efficiency.
The
underwent
evaluation
with
failure
mode
effects
analysis.
Notably,
eight
modes
were
reduced,
including
seven
severity
factors
≥7,
indicating
the
effect
on
patients,
two
Risk
Priority
Number
value
>125,
which
assesses
relative
risk
level.
Efficiency,
measured
by
mouse
clicks,
showed
zero
clicks
workflow.
This
automation
illustrated
improvement
both
efficiency
of
Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown
Published: Jan. 13, 2025
Abstract
Artificial
Intelligence
(AI)
based
auto-segmentation
has
demonstrated
numerous
benefits
to
clinical
radiotherapy
workflows.
However,
the
rapidly
changing
regulatory,
research,
and
market
environment
presents
challenges
around
selecting
evaluating
most
suitable
solution.
To
support
adoption
of
AI
systems,
Selection
Criteria
recommendations
were
developed
enable
a
holistic
evaluation
vendors,
considering
not
only
raw
performance
but
associated
risks
uniquely
related
deployment
AI.
In-house
experience
key
bodies
work
on
ethics,
standards,
best
practices
for
in
Radiation
Oncology
reviewed
inform
selection
criteria
strategies.
A
retrospective
analysis
using
was
performed
across
six
including
quantitative
assessment
five
metrics
(Dice,
Hausdorff
Distance,
Average
Surface
Dice,
Added
Path
Length)
20
head
neck,
thoracic,
19
male
pelvis
patients
models
as
March
2023.
total
47
identified
seven
categories.
showed
that
overall
no
vendor
exceedingly
well,
with
systematically
poor
Data
Security
&
Responsibility,
Vendor
Support
Tools,
Transparency
Ethics.
In
terms
performance,
vendors
varied
widely
from
excellent
poor.
As
new
regulations
come
into
force
scope
systems
adapt
needs,
continued
interest
ensuring
safe,
fair,
transparent
will
persist.
The
framework
provided
herein
aims
promote
user
confidence
by
exploring
breadth
clinically
relevant
factors
informed
decision-making.
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown
Published: Feb. 13, 2025
Abstract
Purpose
Deep
learning‐based
segmentation
of
organs‐at‐risk
(OAR)
is
emerging
to
become
mainstream
in
clinical
practice
because
the
superior
performance
over
atlas
and
model‐based
autocontouring
methods.
While
several
commercial
deep
autosegmentation
solutions
are
now
available,
implementation
these
tools
still
at
such
a
primitive
stage
that
acceptance
criteria
underdeveloped
due
lack
knowledge
about
systems’
tendencies
failure
modes.
As
starting
point
iterative
process
implementation,
this
study
focuses
on
outlier
analysis
four
for
abdominal
OARs.
Materials
methods
The
software,
developed
by
Limbus
AI,
MIM
Contour
ProtégéAI,
Radformation
AutoContour,
Siemens
syngo.via,
were
used
segment
111
patient
cases.
Geometric
accuracy
was
quantitatively
compared
with
contours
using
dice
similarity
coefficient
(DSC)
95%
Hausdorff
distance
(HD95).
outliers
from
quantitative
evaluations
each
software
analyzed
liver,
stomach,
kidneys
possible
causes
summarized
into
six
categories:
(1)
difference
contouring
style
or
guideline,
(2)
image
acquisition
quality,
(3)
abnormal
anatomy
OAR,
(4)
abutting
organs/tissues,
(5)
external/internal
devices,
(6)
other
causes.
Results
For
liver
segmentation,
most
prominent
cause
discrepancies
Limbus,
which
occurred
its
outliers,
existence
biliary
stent
internal/external
drain
as
well
resulting
pneumobilia.
included
organs
shared
CT
numbers
similar
those
5/8
outliers.
12
13
Radformation's
heart
and/or
stomach
while
not
only
presence
barium
5/11
but
also
produced
fragmented
Only
provided
imaging
contrast
directly
caused
incomplete
delineation
10/12
21/25
kidneys,
consistently
followed
RTOG
guidelines,
whereas
institutional
excluded
renal
pelvis
some
cases,
19/25
18/23
By
contrast,
appeared
follow
different
guidelines
exclude
pelvis.
Fragmented
kidney
found
10/15
25/26
ones
linked
use
IV
imaging,
there
enough
evidence
identify
origin
Limbus's
contours.
Conclusion
OAR.
This
work
can
help
vendors
improve
their
inform
users
potential
modes
when
tools.