1
|
Philip MM, Watts J, Moeini SNM, Musheb M, McKiddie F, Welch A, Nath M. Comparison of semi-automatic and manual segmentation methods for tumor delineation on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) positron emission tomography (PET) images. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:095005. [PMID: 38530298 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad37ea] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2023] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 03/27/2024]
Abstract
Objective. Accurate and reproducible tumor delineation on positron emission tomography (PET) images is required to validate predictive and prognostic models based on PET radiomic features. Manual segmentation of tumors is time-consuming whereas semi-automatic methods are easily implementable and inexpensive. This study assessed the reliability of semi-automatic segmentation methods over manual segmentation for tumor delineation in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) PET images.Approach. We employed manual and six semi-automatic segmentation methods (just enough interaction (JEI), watershed, grow from seeds (GfS), flood filling (FF), 30% SUVmax and 40%SUVmax threshold) using 3D slicer software to extract 128 radiomic features from FDG-PET images of 100 HNSCC patients independently by three operators. We assessed the distributional properties of all features and considered 92 log-transformed features for subsequent analysis. For each paired comparison of a feature, we fitted a separate linear mixed effect model using the method (two levels; manual versus one semi-automatic method) as a fixed effect and the subject and the operator as the random effects. We estimated different statistics-the intraclass correlation coefficient agreement (aICC), limits of agreement (LoA), total deviation index (TDI), coverage probability (CP) and coefficient of individual agreement (CIA)-to evaluate the agreement between the manual and semi-automatic methods.Main results. Accounting for all statistics across 92 features, the JEI method consistently demonstrated acceptable agreement with the manual method, with median values of aICC = 0.86, TDI = 0.94, CP = 0.66, and CIA = 0.91.Significance. This study demonstrated that JEI method is a reliable semi-automatic method for tumor delineation on HNSCC PET images.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mahima Merin Philip
- Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, United Kingdom
| | - Jessica Watts
- National Health Service Grampian, Aberdeen AB15 6RE, United Kingdom
| | | | - Mohammed Musheb
- National Health Service Highland, Inverness IV2 3BW, United Kingdom
| | - Fergus McKiddie
- National Health Service Grampian, Aberdeen AB15 6RE, United Kingdom
| | - Andy Welch
- Institute of Education in Healthcare and Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, United Kingdom
| | - Mintu Nath
- Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Xiong X, Smith BJ, Graves SA, Graham MM, Buatti JM, Beichel RR. Head and Neck Cancer Segmentation in FDG PET Images: Performance Comparison of Convolutional Neural Networks and Vision Transformers. Tomography 2023; 9:1933-1948. [PMID: 37888743 PMCID: PMC10611182 DOI: 10.3390/tomography9050151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 10/11/2023] [Accepted: 10/13/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have a proven track record in medical image segmentation. Recently, Vision Transformers were introduced and are gaining popularity for many computer vision applications, including object detection, classification, and segmentation. Machine learning algorithms such as CNNs or Transformers are subject to an inductive bias, which can have a significant impact on the performance of machine learning models. This is especially relevant for medical image segmentation applications where limited training data are available, and a model's inductive bias should help it to generalize well. In this work, we quantitatively assess the performance of two CNN-based networks (U-Net and U-Net-CBAM) and three popular Transformer-based segmentation network architectures (UNETR, TransBTS, and VT-UNet) in the context of HNC lesion segmentation in volumetric [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET scans. For performance assessment, 272 FDG PET-CT scans of a clinical trial (ACRIN 6685) were utilized, which includes a total of 650 lesions (primary: 272 and secondary: 378). The image data used are highly diverse and representative for clinical use. For performance analysis, several error metrics were utilized. The achieved Dice coefficient ranged from 0.833 to 0.809 with the best performance being achieved by CNN-based approaches. U-Net-CBAM, which utilizes spatial and channel attention, showed several advantages for smaller lesions compared to the standard U-Net. Furthermore, our results provide some insight regarding the image features relevant for this specific segmentation application. In addition, results highlight the need to utilize primary as well as secondary lesions to derive clinically relevant segmentation performance estimates avoiding biases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaofan Xiong
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
| | - Brian J. Smith
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
| | - Stephen A. Graves
- Department of Radiology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA; (S.A.G.)
| | - Michael M. Graham
- Department of Radiology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA; (S.A.G.)
| | - John M. Buatti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
| | - Reinhard R. Beichel
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Philip MM, Welch A, McKiddie F, Nath M. A systematic review and meta-analysis of predictive and prognostic models for outcome prediction using positron emission tomography radiomics in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients. Cancer Med 2023; 12:16181-16194. [PMID: 37353996 PMCID: PMC10469753 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6278] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 06/11/2023] [Indexed: 06/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Positron emission tomography (PET) images of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients can assess the functional and biochemical processes at cellular levels. Therefore, PET radiomics-based prediction and prognostic models have the potentials to understand tumour heterogeneity and assist clinicians with diagnosis, prognosis and management of the disease. We conducted a systematic review of published modelling information to evaluate the usefulness of PET radiomics in the prediction and prognosis of HNSCC patients. METHODS We searched bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science) from 2010 to 2021 and considered 31 studies with pre-defined inclusion criteria. We followed the CHARMS checklist for data extraction and performed quality assessment using the PROBAST tool. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the accuracy of the prediction and prognostic models using the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and average C-statistic, respectively. RESULTS Manual segmentation method followed by 40% of the maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax ) thresholding is a commonly used approach. The area under the receiver operating curves of externally validated prediction models ranged between 0.60-0.87, 0.65-0.86 and 0.62-0.75 for overall survival, distant metastasis and recurrence, respectively. Most studies highlighted an overall high risk of bias (outcome definition, statistical methodologies and external validation of models) and high unclear concern in terms of applicability. The meta-analysis showed the estimated pooled DOR of 6.75 (95% CI: 4.45, 10.23) for prediction models and the C-statistic of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67, 0.74) for prognostic models. CONCLUSIONS Both prediction and prognostic models using clinical variables and PET radiomics demonstrated reliable accuracy for detecting adverse outcomes in HNSCC, suggesting the prospect of PET radiomics in clinical settings for diagnosis, prognosis and management of HNSCC patients. Future studies of prediction and prognostic models should emphasise the quality of reporting, external model validation, generalisability to real clinical scenarios and enhanced reproducibility of results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Andy Welch
- Institute of Education in Healthcare and Medical Sciences, University of AberdeenAberdeenUK
| | | | - Mintu Nath
- Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of AberdeenAberdeenUK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Schouten JPE, Noteboom S, Martens RM, Mes SW, Leemans CR, de Graaf P, Steenwijk MD. Automatic segmentation of head and neck primary tumors on MRI using a multi-view CNN. Cancer Imaging 2022; 22:8. [PMID: 35033188 PMCID: PMC8761340 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-022-00445-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2021] [Accepted: 12/31/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Accurate segmentation of head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) is important for radiotherapy treatment planning. Manual segmentation of these tumors is time-consuming and vulnerable to inconsistencies between experts, especially in the complex head and neck region. The aim of this study is to introduce and evaluate an automatic segmentation pipeline for HNSCC using a multi-view CNN (MV-CNN). Methods The dataset included 220 patients with primary HNSCC and availability of T1-weighted, STIR and optionally contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR images together with a manual reference segmentation of the primary tumor by an expert. A T1-weighted standard space of the head and neck region was created to register all MRI sequences to. An MV-CNN was trained with these three MRI sequences and evaluated in terms of volumetric and spatial performance in a cross-validation by measuring intra-class correlation (ICC) and dice similarity score (DSC), respectively. Results The average manual segmented primary tumor volume was 11.8±6.70 cm3 with a median [IQR] of 13.9 [3.22-15.9] cm3. The tumor volume measured by MV-CNN was 22.8±21.1 cm3 with a median [IQR] of 16.0 [8.24-31.1] cm3. Compared to the manual segmentations, the MV-CNN scored an average ICC of 0.64±0.06 and a DSC of 0.49±0.19. Improved segmentation performance was observed with increasing primary tumor volume: the smallest tumor volume group (<3 cm3) scored a DSC of 0.26±0.16 and the largest group (>15 cm3) a DSC of 0.63±0.11 (p<0.001). The automated segmentation tended to overestimate compared to the manual reference, both around the actual primary tumor and in false positively classified healthy structures and pathologically enlarged lymph nodes. Conclusion An automatic segmentation pipeline was evaluated for primary HNSCC on MRI. The MV-CNN produced reasonable segmentation results, especially on large tumors, but overestimation decreased overall performance. In further research, the focus should be on decreasing false positives and make it valuable in treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jens P E Schouten
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Samantha Noteboom
- Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roland M Martens
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Steven W Mes
- Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C René Leemans
- Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pim de Graaf
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn D Steenwijk
- Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,, De Boelelaan 1108, 1081 HZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shiri I, Arabi H, Sanaat A, Jenabi E, Becker M, Zaidi H. Fully Automated Gross Tumor Volume Delineation From PET in Head and Neck Cancer Using Deep Learning Algorithms. Clin Nucl Med 2021; 46:872-883. [PMID: 34238799 DOI: 10.1097/rlu.0000000000003789] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The availability of automated, accurate, and robust gross tumor volume (GTV) segmentation algorithms is critical for the management of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. In this work, we evaluated 3 state-of-the-art deep learning algorithms combined with 8 different loss functions for PET image segmentation using a comprehensive training set and evaluated its performance on an external validation set of HNC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS 18F-FDG PET/CT images of 470 patients presenting with HNC on which manually defined GTVs serving as standard of reference were used for training (340 patients), evaluation (30 patients), and testing (100 patients from different centers) of these algorithms. PET image intensity was converted to SUVs and normalized in the range (0-1) using the SUVmax of the whole data set. PET images were cropped to 12 × 12 × 12 cm3 subvolumes using isotropic voxel spacing of 3 × 3 × 3 mm3 containing the whole tumor and neighboring background including lymph nodes. We used different approaches for data augmentation, including rotation (-15 degrees, +15 degrees), scaling (-20%, 20%), random flipping (3 axes), and elastic deformation (sigma = 1 and proportion to deform = 0.7) to increase the number of training sets. Three state-of-the-art networks, including Dense-VNet, NN-UNet, and Res-Net, with 8 different loss functions, including Dice, generalized Wasserstein Dice loss, Dice plus XEnt loss, generalized Dice loss, cross-entropy, sensitivity-specificity, and Tversky, were used. Overall, 28 different networks were built. Standard image segmentation metrics, including Dice similarity, image-derived PET metrics, first-order, and shape radiomic features, were used for performance assessment of these algorithms. RESULTS The best results in terms of Dice coefficient (mean ± SD) were achieved by cross-entropy for Res-Net (0.86 ± 0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.87), Dense-VNet (0.85 ± 0.058; 95% CI, 0.84-0.86), and Dice plus XEnt for NN-UNet (0.87 ± 0.05; 95% CI, 0.86-0.88). The difference between the 3 networks was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The percent relative error (RE%) of SUVmax quantification was less than 5% in networks with a Dice coefficient more than 0.84, whereas a lower RE% (0.41%) was achieved by Res-Net with cross-entropy loss. For maximum 3-dimensional diameter and sphericity shape features, all networks achieved a RE ≤ 5% and ≤10%, respectively, reflecting a small variability. CONCLUSIONS Deep learning algorithms exhibited promising performance for automated GTV delineation on HNC PET images. Different loss functions performed competitively when using different networks and cross-entropy for Res-Net, Dense-VNet, and Dice plus XEnt for NN-UNet emerged as reliable networks for GTV delineation. Caution should be exercised for clinical deployment owing to the occurrence of outliers in deep learning-based algorithms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isaac Shiri
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Hossein Arabi
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Amirhossein Sanaat
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Elnaz Jenabi
- Research Centre for Nuclear Medicine, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Parkinson C, Matthams C, Foley K, Spezi E. Artificial intelligence in radiation oncology: A review of its current status and potential application for the radiotherapy workforce. Radiography (Lond) 2021; 27 Suppl 1:S63-S68. [PMID: 34493445 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2021.07.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Revised: 07/05/2021] [Accepted: 07/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Radiation oncology is a continually evolving speciality. With the development of new imaging modalities and advanced imaging processing techniques, there is an increasing amount of data available to practitioners. In this narrative review, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is used as a reference to machine learning, and its potential, along with current problems in the field of radiation oncology, are considered from a technical position. KEY FINDINGS AI has the potential to harness the availability of data for improving patient outcomes, reducing toxicity, and easing clinical burdens. However, problems including the requirement of complexity of data, undefined core outcomes and limited generalisability are apparent. CONCLUSION This original review highlights considerations for the radiotherapy workforce, particularly therapeutic radiographers, as there will be an increasing requirement for their familiarity with AI due to their unique position as the interface between imaging technology and patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Collaboration between AI experts and the radiotherapy workforce are required to overcome current issues before clinical adoption. The development of educational resources and standardised reporting of AI studies may help facilitate this.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Parkinson
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, UK.
| | | | | | - E Spezi
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
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
|
8
|
Lapa C, Nestle U, Albert NL, Baues C, Beer A, Buck A, Budach V, Bütof R, Combs SE, Derlin T, Eiber M, Fendler WP, Furth C, Gani C, Gkika E, Grosu AL, Henkenberens C, Ilhan H, Löck S, Marnitz-Schulze S, Miederer M, Mix M, Nicolay NH, Niyazi M, Pöttgen C, Rödel CM, Schatka I, Schwarzenboeck SM, Todica AS, Weber W, Wegen S, Wiegel T, Zamboglou C, Zips D, Zöphel K, Zschaeck S, Thorwarth D, Troost EGC. Value of PET imaging for radiation therapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2021; 197:1-23. [PMID: 34259912 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-021-01812-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 06/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
This comprehensive review written by experts in their field gives an overview on the current status of incorporating positron emission tomography (PET) into radiation treatment planning. Moreover, it highlights ongoing studies for treatment individualisation and per-treatment tumour response monitoring for various primary tumours. Novel tracers and image analysis methods are discussed. The authors believe this contribution to be of crucial value for experts in the field as well as for policy makers deciding on the reimbursement of this powerful imaging modality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Constantin Lapa
- Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Ursula Nestle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kliniken Maria Hilf, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nathalie L Albert
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Baues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiotherapy, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Ambros Beer
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Andreas Buck
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Volker Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | - Rebecca Bütof
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Thorsten Derlin
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Matthias Eiber
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Wolfgang P Fendler
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)-University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Christian Furth
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Cihan Gani
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca-L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Christoph Henkenberens
- Department of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medical School Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Harun Ilhan
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Simone Marnitz-Schulze
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiotherapy, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Matthias Miederer
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Michael Mix
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Nils H Nicolay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Pöttgen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, West German Cancer Centre, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Claus M Rödel
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Frankfurt, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Imke Schatka
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Andrei S Todica
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Weber
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Simone Wegen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiotherapy, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Daniel Zips
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Klaus Zöphel
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, Helmholtz Association/Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Sebastian Zschaeck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Daniela Thorwarth
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Section for Biomedical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
- OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, Helmholtz Association/Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany.
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lapa C, Nestle U, Albert NL, Baues C, Beer A, Buck A, Budach V, Bütof R, Combs SE, Derlin T, Eiber M, Fendler WP, Furth C, Gani C, Gkika E, Grosu AL, Henkenberens C, Ilhan H, Löck S, Marnitz-Schulze S, Miederer M, Mix M, Nicolay NH, Niyazi M, Pöttgen C, Rödel CM, Schatka I, Schwarzenboeck SM, Todica AS, Weber W, Wegen S, Wiegel T, Zamboglou C, Zips D, Zöphel K, Zschaeck S, Thorwarth D, Troost EGC. Value of PET imaging for radiation therapy. Nuklearmedizin 2021; 60:326-343. [PMID: 34261141 DOI: 10.1055/a-1525-7029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
This comprehensive review written by experts in their field gives an overview on the current status of incorporating positron emission tomography (PET) into radiation treatment planning. Moreover, it highlights ongoing studies for treatment individualisation and per-treatment tumour response monitoring for various primary tumours. Novel tracers and image analysis methods are discussed. The authors believe this contribution to be of crucial value for experts in the field as well as for policy makers deciding on the reimbursement of this powerful imaging modality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Constantin Lapa
- Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Ursula Nestle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Kliniken Maria Hilf, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nathalie L Albert
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Baues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiotherapy, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Ambros Beer
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Andreas Buck
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Volker Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | - Rebecca Bütof
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Thorsten Derlin
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Germany
| | - Matthias Eiber
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Wolfgang P Fendler
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)-University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Christian Furth
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Cihan Gani
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | | | - Harun Ilhan
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Simone Marnitz-Schulze
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiotherapy, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Matthias Miederer
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Michael Mix
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Nils H Nicolay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Pöttgen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, West German Cancer Centre, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Claus M Rödel
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Frankfurt, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Imke Schatka
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Andrei S Todica
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Weber
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Simone Wegen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiotherapy, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Daniel Zips
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Klaus Zöphel
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz Association/Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Sebastian Zschaeck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Daniela Thorwarth
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Section for Biomedical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz Association/Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Automatic segmentation of gross target volume of nasopharynx cancer using ensemble of multiscale deep neural networks with spatial attention. Neurocomputing 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.neucom.2020.06.146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
11
|
Boyle AJ, Gaudet VC, Black SE, Vasdev N, Rosa-Neto P, Zukotynski KA. Artificial intelligence for molecular neuroimaging. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2021; 9:822. [PMID: 34268435 PMCID: PMC8246223 DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-6220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2020] [Accepted: 01/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) or the study of how computers and machines can gain intelligence, has been increasingly applied to problems in medical imaging, and in particular to molecular imaging of the central nervous system. Many AI innovations in medical imaging include improving image quality, segmentation, and automating classification of disease. These advances have led to an increased availability of supportive AI tools to assist physicians in interpreting images and making decisions affecting patient care. This review focuses on the role of AI in molecular neuroimaging, primarily applied to positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). We emphasize technical innovations such as AI in computed tomography (CT) generation for the purposes of attenuation correction and disease localization, as well as applications in neuro-oncology and neurodegenerative diseases. Limitations and future prospects for AI in molecular brain imaging are also discussed. Just as new equipment such as SPECT and PET revolutionized the field of medical imaging a few decades ago, AI and its related technologies are now poised to bring on further disruptive changes. An understanding of these new technologies and how they work will help physicians adapt their practices and succeed with these new tools.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda J Boyle
- Azrieli Centre for Neuro-Radiochemistry, Brain Health Imaging Centre, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Vincent C Gaudet
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sandra E Black
- Department of Medicine (Neurology), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Neil Vasdev
- Azrieli Centre for Neuro-Radiochemistry, Brain Health Imaging Centre, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Pedro Rosa-Neto
- Translational Neuroimaging Laboratory, McGill University Research Centre for Studies in Aging, Douglas Research Institute, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
Head–Neck Cancer (HNC) has a relevant impact on the oncology patient population and for this reason, the present review is dedicated to this type of neoplastic disease. In particular, a collection of methods aimed at tumor delineation is presented, because this is a fundamental task to perform efficient radiotherapy. Such a segmentation task is often performed on uni-modal data (usually Positron Emission Tomography (PET)) even though multi-modal images are preferred (PET-Computerized Tomography (CT)/PET-Magnetic Resonance (MR)). Datasets can be private or freely provided by online repositories on the web. The adopted techniques can belong to the well-known image processing/computer-vision algorithms or the newest deep learning/artificial intelligence approaches. All these aspects are analyzed in the present review and comparison among various approaches is performed. From the present review, the authors draw the conclusion that despite the encouraging results of computerized approaches, their performance is far from handmade tumor delineation result.
Collapse
|
13
|
Ju Z, Guo W, Gu S, Zhou J, Yang W, Cong X, Dai X, Quan H, Liu J, Qu B, Liu G. CT based automatic clinical target volume delineation using a dense-fully connected convolution network for cervical Cancer radiation therapy. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:243. [PMID: 33685404 PMCID: PMC7938586 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07595-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2020] [Accepted: 10/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is very important to accurately delineate the CTV on the patient's three-dimensional CT image in the radiotherapy process. Limited to the scarcity of clinical samples and the difficulty of automatic delineation, the research of automatic delineation of cervical cancer CTV based on CT images for new patients is slow. This study aimed to assess the value of Dense-Fully Connected Convolution Network (Dense V-Net) in predicting Clinical Target Volume (CTV) pre-delineation in cervical cancer patients for radiotherapy. METHODS In this study, we used Dense V-Net, a dense and fully connected convolutional network with suitable feature learning in small samples to automatically pre-delineate the CTV of cervical cancer patients based on computed tomography (CT) images and then we assessed the outcome. The CT data of 133 patients with stage IB and IIA postoperative cervical cancer with a comparable delineation scope was enrolled in this study. One hundred and thirteen patients were randomly designated as the training set to adjust the model parameters. Twenty cases were used as the test set to assess the network performance. The 8 most representative parameters were also used to assess the pre-sketching accuracy from 3 aspects: sketching similarity, sketching offset, and sketching volume difference. RESULTS The results presented that the DSC, DC/mm, HD/cm, MAD/mm, ∆V, SI, IncI and JD of CTV were 0.82 ± 0.03, 4.28 ± 2.35, 1.86 ± 0.48, 2.52 ± 0.40, 0.09 ± 0.05, 0.84 ± 0.04, 0.80 ± 0.05, and 0.30 ± 0.04, respectively, and the results were greater than those with a single network. CONCLUSIONS Dense V-Net can correctly predict CTV pre-delineation of cervical cancer patients and can be applied in clinical practice after completing simple modifications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhongjian Ju
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center, People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Wen Guo
- School of Physics Science and Technology, Wuhan University, No. 299, Bayi Road, Luojiashan Street, Wuhan, 430072, China
- Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, No. 1 Jianshe East Road, Zhengzhou, 450003, China
| | - Shanshan Gu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center, People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Jin Zhou
- School of Physics Science and Technology, Wuhan University, No. 299, Bayi Road, Luojiashan Street, Wuhan, 430072, China
| | - Wei Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center, People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Xiaohu Cong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center, People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Xiangkun Dai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center, People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Hong Quan
- School of Physics Science and Technology, Wuhan University, No. 299, Bayi Road, Luojiashan Street, Wuhan, 430072, China
| | - Jie Liu
- Beijing Eastraycloud Technology Inc. Chengdu R&D Center.Suite, 1405-1406,Building Guannan Shangyu,NO.1,Xingguang Road,Wuhou District, Chengdu, 610094, China
| | - Baolin Qu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Medical Center, People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
| | - Guocai Liu
- College of Electrical and Information Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, China
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Groendahl AR, Skjei Knudtsen I, Huynh BN, Mulstad M, Moe YM, Knuth F, Tomic O, Indahl UG, Torheim T, Dale E, Malinen E, Futsaether CM. A comparison of methods for fully automatic segmentation of tumors and involved nodes in PET/CT of head and neck cancers. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66:065012. [PMID: 33666176 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abe553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Target volume delineation is a vital but time-consuming and challenging part of radiotherapy, where the goal is to deliver sufficient dose to the target while reducing risks of side effects. For head and neck cancer (HNC) this is complicated by the complex anatomy of the head and neck region and the proximity of target volumes to organs at risk. The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate conventional PET thresholding methods, six classical machine learning algorithms and a 2D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN) for automatic gross tumor volume (GTV) segmentation of HNC in PET/CT images. For the latter two approaches the impact of single versus multimodality input on segmentation quality was also assessed. 197 patients were included in the study. The cohort was split into training and test sets (157 and 40 patients, respectively). Five-fold cross-validation was used on the training set for model comparison and selection. Manual GTV delineations represented the ground truth. Tresholding, classical machine learning and CNN segmentation models were ranked separately according to the cross-validation Sørensen-Dice similarity coefficient (Dice). PET thresholding gave a maximum mean Dice of 0.62, whereas classical machine learning resulted in maximum mean Dice scores of 0.24 (CT) and 0.66 (PET; PET/CT). CNN models obtained maximum mean Dice scores of 0.66 (CT), 0.68 (PET) and 0.74 (PET/CT). The difference in cross-validation Dice between multimodality PET/CT and single modality CNN models was significant (p ≤ 0.0001). The top-ranked PET/CT-based CNN model outperformed the best-performing thresholding and classical machine learning models, giving significantly better segmentations in terms of cross-validation and test set Dice, true positive rate, positive predictive value and surface distance-based metrics (p ≤ 0.0001). Thus, deep learning based on multimodality PET/CT input resulted in superior target coverage and less inclusion of surrounding normal tissue.
Collapse
|
15
|
Accuracy of target delineation by positron emission tomography-based auto-segmentation methods after deformable image registration: A phantom study. Phys Med 2020; 76:194-201. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.07.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2020] [Revised: 06/19/2020] [Accepted: 07/12/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
|
16
|
Duffy IR, Boyle AJ, Vasdev N. Improving PET Imaging Acquisition and Analysis With Machine Learning: A Narrative Review With Focus on Alzheimer's Disease and Oncology. Mol Imaging 2020; 18:1536012119869070. [PMID: 31429375 PMCID: PMC6702769 DOI: 10.1177/1536012119869070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) algorithms have found increasing utility in the medical imaging field and numerous applications in the analysis of digital biomarkers within positron emission tomography (PET) imaging have emerged. Interest in the use of artificial intelligence in PET imaging for the study of neurodegenerative diseases and oncology stems from the potential for such techniques to streamline decision support for physicians providing early and accurate diagnosis and allowing personalized treatment regimens. In this review, the use of ML to improve PET image acquisition and reconstruction is presented, along with an overview of its applications in the analysis of PET images for the study of Alzheimer's disease and oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ian R Duffy
- 1 Azrieli Centre for Neuro-Radiochemistry, Research Imaging Centre, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Amanda J Boyle
- 1 Azrieli Centre for Neuro-Radiochemistry, Research Imaging Centre, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Neil Vasdev
- 1 Azrieli Centre for Neuro-Radiochemistry, Research Imaging Centre, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,2 Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Alasal SA, AL Bashabsheh E, Najadat H. Overview of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) for Brain Functions Degeneration Classification. 2020 11TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS (ICICS) 2020. [DOI: 10.1109/icics49469.2020.239500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
|
18
|
Guo Z, Guo N, Gong K, Zhong S, Li Q. Gross tumor volume segmentation for head and neck cancer radiotherapy using deep dense multi-modality network. Phys Med Biol 2019; 64:205015. [PMID: 31514173 PMCID: PMC7186044 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab440d] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
In radiation therapy, the accurate delineation of gross tumor volume (GTV) is crucial for treatment planning. However, it is challenging for head and neck cancer (HNC) due to the morphology complexity of various organs in the head, low targets to background contrast and potential artifacts on conventional planning CT images. Thus, manual delineation of GTV on anatomical images is extremely time consuming and suffers from inter-observer variability that leads to planning uncertainty. With the wide use of PET/CT imaging in oncology, complementary functional and anatomical information can be utilized for tumor contouring and bring a significant advantage for radiation therapy planning. In this study, by taking advantage of multi-modality PET and CT images, we propose an automatic GTV segmentation framework based on deep learning for HNC. The backbone of this segmentation framework is based on 3D convolution with dense connections which enables a better information propagation and takes full advantage of the features extracted from multi-modality input images. We evaluate our proposed framework on a dataset including 250 HNC patients. Each patient receives both planning CT and PET/CT imaging before radiation therapy (RT). Manually delineated GTV contours by radiation oncologists are used as ground truth in this study. To further investigate the advantage of our proposed Dense-Net framework, we also compared with the framework using 3D U-Net which is the state-of-the-art in segmentation tasks. Meanwhile, for each frame, the performance comparison between single modality input (PET or CT image) and multi-modality input (both PET/CT) is conducted. Dice coefficient, mean surface distance (MSD), 95th-percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95) and displacement of mass centroid (DMC) are calculated for quantitative evaluation. The dataset is split into train (140 patients), validation (35 patients) and test (75 patients) groups to optimize the network. Based on the results on independent test group, our proposed multi-modality Dense-Net (Dice 0.73) shows better performance than the compared network (Dice 0.71). Furthermore, the proposed Dense-Net structure has less trainable parameters than the 3D U-Net, which reduces the prediction variability. In conclusion, our proposed multi-modality Dense-Net can enable satisfied GTV segmentation for HNC using multi-modality images and yield superior performance than conventional methods. Our proposed method provides an automatic, fast and consistent solution for GTV segmentation and shows potentials to be generally applied for radiation therapy planning of a variety of cancer (e.g. lung, sarcoma, liver and so on).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhe Guo
- School of Information and Electronics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China 100081
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA 02114
| | - Ning Guo
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA 02114
| | - Kuang Gong
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA 02114
| | - Shun’an Zhong
- School of Information and Electronics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China 100081
| | - Quanzheng Li
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA 02114
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Whybra P, Parkinson C, Foley K, Staffurth J, Spezi E. Assessing radiomic feature robustness to interpolation in 18F-FDG PET imaging. Sci Rep 2019; 9:9649. [PMID: 31273242 PMCID: PMC6609613 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-46030-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2019] [Accepted: 06/17/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiomic studies link quantitative imaging features to patient outcomes in an effort to personalise treatment in oncology. To be clinically useful, a radiomic feature must be robust to image processing steps, which has made robustness testing a necessity for many technical aspects of feature extraction. We assessed the stability of radiomic features to interpolation processing and categorised features based on stable, systematic, or unstable responses. Here, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET images for 441 oesophageal cancer patients (split: testing = 353, validation = 88) were resampled to 6 isotropic voxel sizes (1.5 mm, 1.8 mm, 2.0 mm, 2.2 mm, 2.5 mm, 2.7 mm) and 141 features were extracted from each volume of interest (VOI). Features were categorised into four groups with two statistical tests. Feature reliability was analysed using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and patient ranking consistency was assessed using a Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (ρ). We categorised 93 features robust and 6 limited robustness (stable responses), 34 potentially correctable (systematic responses), and 8 not robust (unstable responses). We developed a correction technique for features with potential systematic variation that used surface fits to link voxel size and percentage change in feature value. Twenty-nine potentially correctable features were re-categorised to robust for the validation dataset, after applying corrections defined by surface fits generated on the testing dataset. Furthermore, we found the choice of interpolation algorithm alone (spline vs trilinear) resulted in large variation in values for a number of features but the response categorisations remained constant. This study attempted to quantify the diverse response of radiomics features commonly found in 18F-FDG PET clinical modelling to isotropic voxel size interpolation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip Whybra
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
| | - Craig Parkinson
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Emiliano Spezi
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.,Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Clark CH, Gagliardi G, Heijmen B, Malicki J, Thorwarth D, Verellen D, Muren LP. Adapting training for medical physicists to match future trends in radiation oncology. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2019; 11:71-75. [PMID: 33458282 PMCID: PMC7807663 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2019.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Catharine H. Clark
- Medical Physics, St Lukes Cancer Centre, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
- Dept Medical Physics, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK
| | - Giovanna Gagliardi
- Department of Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ben Heijmen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Julian Malicki
- Department of Electroradiology, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland
- Department of Medical Physics, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznań, Poland
| | - Daniela Thorwarth
- Section for Biomedical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Germany
| | - Dirk Verellen
- Iridium Kankernetwerk, Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Belgium
| | - Ludvig P. Muren
- Department of Medical Physics, Aarhus University Hospital/Aarhus University, Denmark
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Hargreaves S, Johnstone E, Parkinson C, Rackley T, Spezi E, Staffurth J, Evans M. Interim 18F-FDG Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography During Chemoradiotherapy in the Management of Cancer Patients: a Response. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2019; 31:669-670. [PMID: 31151841 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2019.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2019] [Revised: 04/24/2019] [Accepted: 05/09/2019] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - E Johnstone
- Department of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - C Parkinson
- Department of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - E Spezi
- Department of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - J Staffurth
- Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, UK; Department of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - M Evans
- Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART): Conceptual Considerations for the Informed Clinician. Semin Radiat Oncol 2019; 29:258-273. [PMID: 31027643 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2019.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
For nearly 2 decades, adaptive radiation therapy (ART) has been proposed as a method to account for changes in head and neck tumor and normal tissue to enhance therapeutic ratios. While technical advances in imaging, planning and delivery have allowed greater capacity for ART delivery, and a series of dosimetric explorations have consistently shown capacity for improvement, there remains a paucity of clinical trials demonstrating the utility of ART. Furthermore, while ad hoc implementation of head and neck ART is reported, systematic full-scale head and neck ART remains an as yet unreached reality. To some degree, this lack of scalability may be related to not only the complexity of ART, but also variability in the nomenclature and descriptions of what is encompassed by ART. Consequently, we present an overview of the history, current status, and recommendations for the future of ART, with an eye toward improving the clarity and description of head and neck ART for interested clinicians, noting practical considerations for implementation of an ART program or clinical trial. Process level considerations for ART are noted, reminding the reader that, paraphrasing the writer Elbert Hubbard, "Art is not a thing, it is a way."
Collapse
|
23
|
Parkinson C, Evans M, Guerrero-Urbano T, Michaelidou A, Pike L, Barrington S, Jayaprakasam V, Rackley T, Palaniappan N, Staffurth J, Marshall C, Spezi E. Machine-learned target volume delineation of 18F-FDG PET images after one cycle of induction chemotherapy. Phys Med 2019; 61:85-93. [PMID: 31151585 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.04.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2018] [Revised: 04/04/2019] [Accepted: 04/23/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Biological tumour volume (GTVPET) delineation on 18F-FDG PET acquired during induction chemotherapy (ICT) is challenging due to the reduced metabolic uptake and volume of the GTVPET. Automatic segmentation algorithms applied to 18F-FDG PET (PET-AS) imaging have been used for GTVPET delineation on 18F-FDG PET imaging acquired before ICT. However, their role has not been investigated in 18F-FDG PET imaging acquired after ICT. In this study we investigate PET-AS techniques, including ATLAAS a machine learned method, for accurate delineation of the GTVPET after ICT. Twenty patients were enrolled onto a prospective phase I study (FiGaRO). PET/CT imaging was acquired at baseline and 3 weeks following 1 cycle of induction chemotherapy. The GTVPET was manually delineated by a nuclear medicine physician and clinical oncologist. The resulting GTVPET was used as the reference contour. The ATLAAS original statistical model was expanded to include images of reduced metabolic activity and the ATLAAS algorithm was re-trained on the new reference dataset. Estimated GTVPET contours were derived using sixteen PET-AS methods and compared to the GTVPET using the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). The mean DSC for ATLAAS, 60% Peak Thresholding (PT60), Adaptive Thresholding (AT) and Watershed Thresholding (WT) was 0.72, 0.61, 0.63 and 0.60 respectively. The GTVPET generated by ATLAAS compared favourably with manually delineated volumes and in comparison, to other PET-AS methods, was more accurate for GTVPET delineation after ICT. ATLAAS would be a feasible method to reduce inter-observer variability in multi-centre trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Craig Parkinson
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Queen's Buildings, 14-17 The Parade, Cardiff CF24 3AA, UK.
| | - Mererid Evans
- Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Rd, Cardiff CF14 2TL, UK
| | | | | | - Lucy Pike
- King's College London and Guy's and St Thomas' PET Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, King's Health Partners, London, UK
| | - Sally Barrington
- King's College London and Guy's and St Thomas' PET Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, King's Health Partners, London, UK
| | | | - Thomas Rackley
- Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Rd, Cardiff CF14 2TL, UK
| | | | - John Staffurth
- Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Rd, Cardiff CF14 2TL, UK; School of Medicine, UHW Main Building, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XN, UK
| | - Christopher Marshall
- Wales Research & Diagnostic PET Imaging Centre, Cardiff University, School of Medicine, Ground Floor, C Block, UHW Main Building, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XN, UK
| | - Emiliano Spezi
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Queen's Buildings, 14-17 The Parade, Cardiff CF24 3AA, UK; Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Rd, Cardiff CF14 2TL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Helali M, Moreau M, Le Fèvre C, Heimburger C, Bund C, Goichot B, Veillon F, Hubelé F, Charpiot A, Noel G, Imperiale A. 18F-FDOPA PET/CT Combined with MRI for Gross Tumor Volume Delineation in Patients with Skull Base Paraganglioma. Cancers (Basel) 2019; 11:cancers11010054. [PMID: 30626096 PMCID: PMC6360018 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11010054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2018] [Revised: 12/30/2018] [Accepted: 01/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
In this simulation study, we assessed differences in gross tumor volume (GTV) in a series of skull base paragangliomas (SBPGLs) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 18F-dihydroxyphenylalanine (18F-FDOPA) combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), and 18F-FDOPA PET/MRI images obtained by rigid alignment of PET and MRI. GTV was delineated in 16 patients with SBPGLs on MRI (GTVMRI), 18F-FDOPA PET/CT (GTVPET), and combined PET/MRI (GTVPET/MRI). GTVPET/MRI was the union of GTVMRI and GTVPET after visual adjustment. Three observers delineated GTVMRI and GTVPET/MRI independently. Excellent interobserver reproducibility was found for both GTVMRI and GTVPET/MRI. GTVPET and GTVMRI were not significantly different. However, there was some spatial difference between the locations of GTVMRI, GTVPET, and GTVPET/MRI. The Dice similarity coefficient median value was 0.4 between PET/CT and MRI, and 0.8 between MRI and PET/MRI. The combined use of PET/MRI produced a larger GTV than MRI alone. Nevertheless, both the target-delivered dose and organs-at-risk conservancy were respected when treatment was planned on the PET/MRI-matched data set. Future integration of 18F-FDOPA PET/CT into clinical practice will be necessary to evaluate the influence of this diagnostic modality on SBPGL therapeutic management. If the clinical utility of 18F-FDOPA PET/CT and/or PET/MRI is confirmed, GTVPET/MRI should be considered for tailored radiotherapy planning in patients with SBPGL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mehdi Helali
- Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Matthieu Moreau
- Radiophysics, Centre Paul-Strauss, UNICANCER, 67065 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Clara Le Fèvre
- Radiotherapy, Centre Paul-Strauss, 67065 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Céline Heimburger
- Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
- ICube, University of Strasbourg/CNRS (UMR 7357) and FMTS, Faculty of Medicine, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Caroline Bund
- Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
- ICube, University of Strasbourg/CNRS (UMR 7357) and FMTS, Faculty of Medicine, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Bernard Goichot
- Internal Medicine, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, Strasbourg University, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Francis Veillon
- Radiology, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, Strasbourg University, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Fabrice Hubelé
- Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
- ICube, University of Strasbourg/CNRS (UMR 7357) and FMTS, Faculty of Medicine, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Anne Charpiot
- Otolaryngology and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Georges Noel
- Radiotherapy, Centre Paul-Strauss, 67065 Strasbourg, France.
- Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178, Centre Paul Strauss, UNICANCER, 67065 Strasbourg, France.
| | - Alessio Imperiale
- Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals of Strasbourg, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
- ICube, University of Strasbourg/CNRS (UMR 7357) and FMTS, Faculty of Medicine, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Abstract
There are recent advances, namely, a standardized method for reporting therapy response (Hopkins criteria), a multicenter prospective cohort study with excellent negative predictive value of F-FDG PET/CT for N0 clinical neck, a phase III multicenter randomized controlled study establishing the value of a negative posttherapy F-FDG PET/CT for patient management, a phase II randomized controlled study demonstrating radiation dose reduction strategies for human papilloma virus-related disease, and Food and Drug Administration approval of nivolumab for treatment of recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Collapse
|
26
|
Huang B, Chen Z, Wu PM, Ye Y, Feng ST, Wong CYO, Zheng L, Liu Y, Wang T, Li Q, Huang B. Fully Automated Delineation of Gross Tumor Volume for Head and Neck Cancer on PET-CT Using Deep Learning: A Dual-Center Study. CONTRAST MEDIA & MOLECULAR IMAGING 2018; 2018:8923028. [PMID: 30473644 PMCID: PMC6220410 DOI: 10.1155/2018/8923028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2018] [Revised: 08/28/2018] [Accepted: 09/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
Purpose In this study, we proposed an automated deep learning (DL) method for head and neck cancer (HNC) gross tumor volume (GTV) contouring on positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) images. Materials and Methods PET-CT images were collected from 22 newly diagnosed HNC patients, of whom 17 (Database 1) and 5 (Database 2) were from two centers, respectively. An oncologist and a radiologist decided the gold standard of GTV manually by consensus. We developed a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) and trained the network based on the two-dimensional PET-CT images and the gold standard of GTV in the training dataset. We did two experiments: Experiment 1, with Database 1 only, and Experiment 2, with both Databases 1 and 2. In both Experiment 1 and Experiment 2, we evaluated the proposed method using a leave-one-out cross-validation strategy. We compared the median results in Experiment 2 (GTVa) with the performance of other methods in the literature and with the gold standard (GTVm). Results A tumor segmentation task for a patient on coregistered PET-CT images took less than one minute. The dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of the proposed method in Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 was 0.481∼0.872 and 0.482∼0.868, respectively. The DSC of GTVa was better than that in previous studies. A high correlation was found between GTVa and GTVm (R = 0.99, P < 0.001). The median volume difference (%) between GTVm and GTVa was 10.9%. The median values of DSC, sensitivity, and precision of GTVa were 0.785, 0.764, and 0.789, respectively. Conclusion A fully automatic GTV contouring method for HNC based on DCNN and PET-CT from dual centers has been successfully proposed with high accuracy and efficiency. Our proposed method is of help to the clinicians in HNC management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bin Huang
- School of Biomedical Engineering, Health Science Center, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
| | - Zhewei Chen
- School of Biomedical Engineering, Health Science Center, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
| | - Po-Man Wu
- Medical Physics and Research Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong
| | - Yufeng Ye
- Department of Radiology, Guangzhou Panyu Central Hospital, Guangzhou, China
| | - Shi-Ting Feng
- Department of Radiology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | | | - Liyun Zheng
- School of Biomedical Engineering, Health Science Center, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
| | - Yong Liu
- Intensive Care Unit, Southern Medical University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, China
| | - Tianfu Wang
- School of Biomedical Engineering, Health Science Center, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
| | - Qiaoliang Li
- School of Biomedical Engineering, Health Science Center, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
| | - Bingsheng Huang
- School of Biomedical Engineering, Health Science Center, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Parkinson C, Foley K, Whybra P, Hills R, Roberts A, Marshall C, Staffurth J, Spezi E. Evaluation of prognostic models developed using standardised image features from different PET automated segmentation methods. EJNMMI Res 2018; 8:29. [PMID: 29644499 PMCID: PMC5895559 DOI: 10.1186/s13550-018-0379-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2017] [Accepted: 03/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Prognosis in oesophageal cancer (OC) is poor. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate is approximately 15%. Personalised medicine is hoped to increase the 5- and 10-year OS rates. Quantitative analysis of PET is gaining substantial interest in prognostic research but requires the accurate definition of the metabolic tumour volume. This study compares prognostic models developed in the same patient cohort using individual PET segmentation algorithms and assesses the impact on patient risk stratification. Consecutive patients (n = 427) with biopsy-proven OC were included in final analysis. All patients were staged with PET/CT between September 2010 and July 2016. Nine automatic PET segmentation methods were studied. All tumour contours were subjectively analysed for accuracy, and segmentation methods with < 90% accuracy were excluded. Standardised image features were calculated, and a series of prognostic models were developed using identical clinical data. The proportion of patients changing risk classification group were calculated. Results Out of nine PET segmentation methods studied, clustering means (KM2), general clustering means (GCM3), adaptive thresholding (AT) and watershed thresholding (WT) methods were included for analysis. Known clinical prognostic factors (age, treatment and staging) were significant in all of the developed prognostic models. AT and KM2 segmentation methods developed identical prognostic models. Patient risk stratification was dependent on the segmentation method used to develop the prognostic model with up to 73 patients (17.1%) changing risk stratification group. Conclusion Prognostic models incorporating quantitative image features are dependent on the method used to delineate the primary tumour. This has a subsequent effect on risk stratification, with patients changing groups depending on the image segmentation method used. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13550-018-0379-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Craig Parkinson
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Queen's Buildings, 14-17 The Parade, Cardiff, CF24 3AA, UK
| | - Kieran Foley
- Division of Cancer and Genetics, School of Medicine, UHW Main Building, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XN, UK.
| | - Philip Whybra
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Queen's Buildings, 14-17 The Parade, Cardiff, CF24 3AA, UK
| | - Robert Hills
- Clinical Trials Unit, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AT, UK
| | - Ashley Roberts
- Clinical Radiology, University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW, UK
| | - Chris Marshall
- Wales Research and Diagnostic PET Imaging Centre, Cardiff University, School of Medicine, Ground Floor, C Block, UHW Main Building, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XN, UK
| | - John Staffurth
- Division of Cancer and Genetics, School of Medicine, UHW Main Building, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XN, UK.,Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Rd, Cardiff, CF14 2TL, UK
| | - Emiliano Spezi
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Queen's Buildings, 14-17 The Parade, Cardiff, CF24 3AA, UK.,Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Rd, Cardiff, CF14 2TL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Schick U, Huguet F, Pointreau Y, Pradier O. [Radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: State of the art and future directions]. Cancer Radiother 2017; 21:498-504. [PMID: 28864046 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2017.07.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2017] [Accepted: 07/12/2017] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Therapeutic principles of radiation therapy in head and neck carcinomas will be discussed in this review. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy with concomitant cisplatin should be standard. In case of contraindication to chemotherapy, cetuximab is an option, while hyperfractionation should be considered in patients unfit for concomitant treatment. Concomitant chemotherapy should be administered in the presence of extracapsular extensions and positive margins in the postoperative setting. Current research areas such as desescalation in human papillomavirus-positive tumours, adaptive radiotherapy, radiomics and immunotherapy will also be addressed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- U Schick
- Service de radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie et d'hématologie, CHRU Morvan, 2, avenue Foch, 29200 Brest, France.
| | - F Huguet
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France; Université Paris 6, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France
| | - Y Pointreau
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, institut interrégional de cancérologie, centre Jean-Bernard-clinique Victor-Hugo, 9, rue Beauverger, 72000 Le Mans, France
| | - O Pradier
- Service de radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie et d'hématologie, CHRU Morvan, 2, avenue Foch, 29200 Brest, France
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Thorwarth D. Biologically adapted radiation therapy. Z Med Phys 2017; 28:177-183. [PMID: 28869163 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2017.08.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2017] [Revised: 08/02/2017] [Accepted: 08/07/2017] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
The aim of biologically adapted radiotherapy (RT) is to shape or paint the prescribed radiation dose according to biological properties of the tumor in order to increase local control rates in the future. Human tumors are known to present with an extremely heterogeneous tissue architecture leading to highly variable local cell densities and chaotic vascular structures leading to tumor hypoxia and regions of increased radiation resistance. The goal of biologically adapted RT or dose painting is to individually adapt the radiation dose to biological features of the tumor as non-invasively assessed with functional imaging in order to overcome increased radiation resistance. This article discusses the whole development chain of biologically adapted RT from radio-biologically relevant processes, functional imaging techniques to visualize tumor biology non-invasively and radiation prescription functions to the implementation of biologically adapted RT in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Thorwarth
- Sektion Biomedizinische Physik, Universitätsklinikum für Radioonkologie, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Clinical Practice in PET/CT for the Management of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017; 209:289-303. [PMID: 28731808 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.17.18301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 80] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this article is to summarize the evidence for the value of PET/CT for the management of patients with head and neck squamous cell cancer and suggest best clinical practices. CONCLUSION FDG PET/CT is a valuable imaging tool for identifying unknown primary tumors in patients with known cervical node metastases leading to management change and is the standard of care for the initial staging of stage III and IV head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs), for assessing therapy response when performed at least 12 weeks after chemoradiation therapy, and for avoiding unnecessary planned neck dissection. Neck dissection is avoided if PET/CT findings are negative-regardless of the size of the residual neck nodes-because survival outcomes are not compromised. FDG PET/CT is valuable in detecting recurrences and metastases during follow-up when suspected because of clinical symptoms and serves as a prognostic marker for patient survival outcomes, for 5 years. Using FDG PET/CT for routine surveillance of HNSCC after 6 months of treatment without any clinical suspicion should be discouraged.
Collapse
|
31
|
Berthon B, Spezi E, Galavis P, Shepherd T, Apte A, Hatt M, Fayad H, De Bernardi E, Soffientini CD, Ross Schmidtlein C, El Naqa I, Jeraj R, Lu W, Das S, Zaidi H, Mawlawi OR, Visvikis D, Lee JA, Kirov AS. Toward a standard for the evaluation of PET-Auto-Segmentation methods following the recommendations of AAPM task group No. 211: Requirements and implementation. Med Phys 2017; 44:4098-4111. [PMID: 28474819 PMCID: PMC5575543 DOI: 10.1002/mp.12312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2016] [Revised: 04/07/2017] [Accepted: 04/15/2017] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this paper is to define the requirements and describe the design and implementation of a standard benchmark tool for evaluation and validation of PET‐auto‐segmentation (PET‐AS) algorithms. This work follows the recommendations of Task Group 211 (TG211) appointed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). Methods The recommendations published in the AAPM TG211 report were used to derive a set of required features and to guide the design and structure of a benchmarking software tool. These items included the selection of appropriate representative data and reference contours obtained from established approaches and the description of available metrics. The benchmark was designed in a way that it could be extendable by inclusion of bespoke segmentation methods, while maintaining its main purpose of being a standard testing platform for newly developed PET‐AS methods. An example of implementation of the proposed framework, named PETASset, was built. In this work, a selection of PET‐AS methods representing common approaches to PET image segmentation was evaluated within PETASset for the purpose of testing and demonstrating the capabilities of the software as a benchmark platform. Results A selection of clinical, physical, and simulated phantom data, including “best estimates” reference contours from macroscopic specimens, simulation template, and CT scans was built into the PETASset application database. Specific metrics such as Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Positive Predictive Value (PPV), and Sensitivity (S), were included to allow the user to compare the results of any given PET‐AS algorithm to the reference contours. In addition, a tool to generate structured reports on the evaluation of the performance of PET‐AS algorithms against the reference contours was built. The variation of the metric agreement values with the reference contours across the PET‐AS methods evaluated for demonstration were between 0.51 and 0.83, 0.44 and 0.86, and 0.61 and 1.00 for DSC, PPV, and the S metric, respectively. Examples of agreement limits were provided to show how the software could be used to evaluate a new algorithm against the existing state‐of‐the art. Conclusions PETASset provides a platform that allows standardizing the evaluation and comparison of different PET‐AS methods on a wide range of PET datasets. The developed platform will be available to users willing to evaluate their PET‐AS methods and contribute with more evaluation datasets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beatrice Berthon
- Institut Langevin, ESPCI Paris, PSL Research University, CNRS UMR 7587, INSERM U979, Paris, 75012, France
| | - Emiliano Spezi
- School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF24 3AA, United Kingdom
| | - Paulina Galavis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Langone Medical Center, New York University, New York, NY, 10016, USA
| | - Tony Shepherd
- Turku PET Centre, Turku University Hospital, Turku, 20521, Finland
| | - Aditya Apte
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Mathieu Hatt
- INSERM, UMR 1101, LaTIM, IBSAM, UBO, UBL, Brest, 29609, France
| | - Hadi Fayad
- INSERM, UMR 1101, LaTIM, IBSAM, UBO, UBL, Brest, 29609, France
| | | | - Chiara D Soffientini
- Department of Electronics Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, 20133, Italy
| | - C Ross Schmidtlein
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Issam El Naqa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48103, USA
| | - Robert Jeraj
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| | - Wei Lu
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Shiva Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Habib Zaidi
- Division of Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva CH-1211, Switzerland
| | - Osama R Mawlawi
- Department of Imaging Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | | | - John A Lee
- IREC/MIRO, Université catholique de Louvain (IREC/MIRO) & FNRS, Brussels, 1200, Belgium
| | - Assen S Kirov
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| |
Collapse
|