1
|
Shusharina N, Söderberg J, Lidberg D, Niyazi M, Shih HA, Bortfeld T. Accounting for uncertainties in the position of anatomical barriers used to define the clinical target volume. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [PMID: 34171846 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac0ea3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 06/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
The definition of the clinical target volume (CTV) is becoming the weakest link in the radiotherapy chain. CTV definition consensus guidelines include the geometric expansion beyond the visible gross tumor volume, while avoiding anatomical barriers. In a previous publication we described how to implement these consensus guidelines using deep learning and graph search techniques in a computerized CTV auto-delineation process. In this paper we address the remaining problem of how to deal with uncertainties in positions of the anatomical barriers. The objective was to develop an algorithm that implements the consensus guidelines on considering barrier uncertainties. Our approach is to perform multiple expansions using the fast marching method with barriers in place or removed at different stages of the expansion. We validate the algorithm in a computational phantom and compare manually generated with automated CTV contours, both taking barrier uncertainties into account.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadya Shusharina
- Division of Radiation Biophysics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States of America
| | | | | | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Helen A Shih
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States of America
| | - Thomas Bortfeld
- Division of Radiation Biophysics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bibault JE, Denis F, Roué A, Gibon D, Fumagalli I, Hennequin C, Barillot I, Quéro L, Paumier A, Mahé MA, Servagi Vernat S, Créhange G, Lapeyre M, Blanchard P, Pointreau Y, Lafond C, Huguet F, Mornex F, Latorzeff I, de Crevoisier R, Martin V, Kreps S, Durdux C, Antoni D, Noël G, Giraud P. [Siriade 2.0: An e-learning platform for radiation oncology contouring]. Cancer Radiother 2018; 22:773-777. [PMID: 30360973 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2018.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2017] [Revised: 01/23/2018] [Accepted: 02/08/2018] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In 2008, the French national society of radiation oncology (SFRO) and the association for radiation oncology continued education (AFCOR) created Siriade, an e-learning website dedicated to contouring. MATERIAL AND METHODS Between 2015 and 2017, this platform was updated using the latest digital online tools available. Two main sections were needed: a theoretical part and another section of online workshops. RESULTS Teaching courses are available as online commented videos, available on demand. The practical section of the website is an online contouring workshop that automatically generates a report quantifying the quality of the user's delineation compared with the experts'. CONCLUSION Siriade 2.0 is an innovating digital tool for radiation oncology initial and continuous education.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J-E Bibault
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Paris Sorbonne Cité, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France
| | - F Denis
- Service de radiothérapie, centre Jean-Bernard, 9, rue Beauverger, 72000 Le Mans, France
| | - A Roué
- Institut national des sciences et techniques nucléaires, centre CEA de Saclay, D36, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| | - D Gibon
- Aquilab, parc Eurasanté, biocentre Fleming, 250, rue Salvador-Allende, 59120 Loos, France
| | - I Fumagalli
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefau, 75010 Paris, France
| | - C Hennequin
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefau, 75010 Paris, France
| | - I Barillot
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, centre universitaire de cancérologie Henry-S.-Kaplan, 2, boulevard Tonnellé, 37044 Tours, France; Université François-Rabelais, 2, boulevard Tonnellé, 37044 Tours, France
| | - L Quéro
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefau, 75010 Paris, France
| | - A Paumier
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie de l'Ouest René-Gauducheau, boulevard Professeur-Jacques-Monod, 44805 Saint-Herblain, France
| | - M-A Mahé
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie de l'Ouest René-Gauducheau, boulevard Professeur-Jacques-Monod, 44805 Saint-Herblain, France
| | - S Servagi Vernat
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, institut Jean-Godinot, 1, rue Koenig, 51100 Reims, France
| | - G Créhange
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, centre Georges-François-Leclerc, 1, rue du Professeur-Marion, 21000 Dijon, France
| | - M Lapeyre
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, centre Jean-Perrin, 58, rue Montalembert, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - P Blanchard
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif, France
| | - Y Pointreau
- Service de radiothérapie, centre Jean-Bernard, 9, rue Beauverger, 72000 Le Mans, France
| | - C Lafond
- Service de radiothérapie, centre Jean-Bernard, 9, rue Beauverger, 72000 Le Mans, France
| | - F Huguet
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital Tenon, Hôpitaux universitaires de l'Est parisien, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France; Université Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France
| | - F Mornex
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, CHU Lyon Sud, 65, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - I Latorzeff
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, clinique Pasteur, 1, rue de la Petite-Vitesse, 31300 Toulouse, France
| | - R de Crevoisier
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, centre Eugène-Marquis, avenue de la Bataille-Flandre-Dunkerque, 35700 Rennes, France
| | - V Martin
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefau, 75010 Paris, France
| | - S Kreps
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Paris Sorbonne Cité, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France
| | - C Durdux
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Paris Sorbonne Cité, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France
| | - D Antoni
- Département universitaire de radiothérapie, centre Paul-Strauss, 3, rue de la Porte-de-l'Hôpital, 67065 Strasbourg, France
| | - G Noël
- Département universitaire de radiothérapie, centre Paul-Strauss, 3, rue de la Porte-de-l'Hôpital, 67065 Strasbourg, France
| | - P Giraud
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Paris Sorbonne Cité, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Meillan N, Bibault JE, Vautier J, Daveau-Bergerault C, Kreps S, Tournat H, Durdux C, Giraud P. Automatic Intracranial Segmentation: Is the Clinician Still Needed? Technol Cancer Res Treat 2018; 17:1533034617748839. [PMID: 29343204 PMCID: PMC5784565 DOI: 10.1177/1533034617748839] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2017] [Revised: 10/23/2017] [Accepted: 11/17/2017] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Stereotactic hypofractionated radiotherapy is an effective treatment for brain metastases in oligometastatic patients. Its planning is however time-consuming because of the number of organs at risk to be manually segmented. This study evaluates 2 automated segmentation commercial software. METHODS Patients were scanned in the treatment position. The computed tomography scan was registered on a magnetic resonance imaging and volumes were manually segmented by a clinician. Then 2 automated segmentations were performed (with iPlan and Smart Segmentation). RT STRUCT files were compared with Aquilab's Artistruct segment comparison module. We selected common segmented volume ratio as the main judging criterion. Secondary criteria were Dice-Sørensen coefficients, overlap ratio, and additional segmented volume. RESULTS Twenty consecutive patients were included. Agreement between manual and automated contouring was poor. Common segmented volumes ranged from 7.71% to 82.54%, Dice-Sørensen coefficient ranged from 0.0745 to 0.8398, overlap ratio ranged from 0.0414 to 0.7275, and additional segmented volume ranged from 9.80% to 92.25%. Each software outperformed the other on some organs while performing worse on others. CONCLUSION No software seemed clearly better than the other. Common segmented volumes were much too low for routine use in stereotactic hypofractionated brain radiotherapy. Manual editing is still needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicolas Meillan
- Service de Cancérologie Radiothérapie, Hopital Saint-Louis, Paris, France
| | | | - Julien Vautier
- Service d’Onco-Radiothérapie, Hopital Europeen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | | | - Sarah Kreps
- Service d’Onco-Radiothérapie, Hopital Europeen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Hélène Tournat
- Service d’Onco-Radiothérapie, Hopital Europeen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Catherine Durdux
- Service d’Onco-Radiothérapie, Hopital Europeen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Philippe Giraud
- Service d’Onco-Radiothérapie, Hopital Europeen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Deeley MA, Chen A, Datteri RD, Noble J, Cmelak A, Donnelly E, Malcolm A, Moretti L, Jaboin J, Niermann K, Yang ES, Yu DS, Dawant BM. Segmentation editing improves efficiency while reducing inter-expert variation and maintaining accuracy for normal brain tissues in the presence of space-occupying lesions. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58:4071-97. [PMID: 23685866 DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/58/12/4071] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Image segmentation has become a vital and often rate-limiting step in modern radiotherapy treatment planning. In recent years, the pace and scope of algorithm development, and even introduction into the clinic, have far exceeded evaluative studies. In this work we build upon our previous evaluation of a registration driven segmentation algorithm in the context of 8 expert raters and 20 patients who underwent radiotherapy for large space-occupying tumours in the brain. In this work we tested four hypotheses concerning the impact of manual segmentation editing in a randomized single-blinded study. We tested these hypotheses on the normal structures of the brainstem, optic chiasm, eyes and optic nerves using the Dice similarity coefficient, volume, and signed Euclidean distance error to evaluate the impact of editing on inter-rater variance and accuracy. Accuracy analyses relied on two simulated ground truth estimation methods: simultaneous truth and performance level estimation and a novel implementation of probability maps. The experts were presented with automatic, their own, and their peers' segmentations from our previous study to edit. We found, independent of source, editing reduced inter-rater variance while maintaining or improving accuracy and improving efficiency with at least 60% reduction in contouring time. In areas where raters performed poorly contouring from scratch, editing of the automatic segmentations reduced the prevalence of total anatomical miss from approximately 16% to 8% of the total slices contained within the ground truth estimations. These findings suggest that contour editing could be useful for consensus building such as in developing delineation standards, and that both automated methods and even perhaps less sophisticated atlases could improve efficiency, inter-rater variance, and accuracy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Deeley
- Department of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|