Sarria GR, Kugel F, Roehner F, Layer J, Dejonckheere C, Scafa D, Koeksal M, Leitzen C, Schmeel LC. Artificial Intelligence-Based Autosegmentation: Advantages in Delineation, Absorbed Dose-Distribution, and Logistics.
Adv Radiat Oncol 2024;
9:101394. [PMID:
38292888 PMCID:
PMC10823084 DOI:
10.1016/j.adro.2023.101394]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2023] [Accepted: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 02/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose
The study's purpose was to compare the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) in auto-contouring compared with a human practitioner in terms of precision, differences in dose distribution, and time consumption.
Methods and Materials
Datasets of previously irradiated patients in 3 different segments (head and neck, breast, and prostate cancer) were retrospectively collected. An experienced radiation oncologist (MD) performed organs-at-risk (OARs) and standard clinical target volume delineations as baseline structures for comparison. AI-based autocontours were generated in 2 additional CT copies; therefore, 3 groups were assessed: MD alone, AI alone, and AI plus MD corrections (AI+C). Differences in Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and person-hour burden were assessed. Furthermore, changes in clinically relevant dose-volume parameters were evaluated and compared.
Results
Seventy-five previously treated cases were collected (25 per segment) for the analysis. Compared with MD contours, the mean DSC scores were higher than 0.7 for 74% and 80% of AI and AI+C, respectively. After corrections, 17.1% structures presented DSC score deviations higher than 0.1 and 10.4% dose-volume parameters significantly changed in AI-contoured structures. The time consumption assessment yielded mean person-hour reductions of 68%, 51%, and 71% for breast, prostate, and head and neck cancer, respectively.
Conclusions
In great extent, AI yielded clinically acceptable OARs and certain clinical target volumes in the explored anatomic segments. Sparse correction and assessment requirements place AI+C as a standard workflow. Minimal clinically relevant differences in OAR exposure were identified. A substantial amount of person-hours could be repurposed with this technology.
Collapse