1
|
Fu Y, Zhang H, Morris ED, Glide-Hurst CK, Pai S, Traverso A, Wee L, Hadzic I, Lønne PI, Shen C, Liu T, Yang X. Artificial Intelligence in Radiation Therapy. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RADIATION AND PLASMA MEDICAL SCIENCES 2022; 6:158-181. [PMID: 35992632 PMCID: PMC9385128 DOI: 10.1109/trpms.2021.3107454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has great potential to transform the clinical workflow of radiotherapy. Since the introduction of deep neural networks, many AI-based methods have been proposed to address challenges in different aspects of radiotherapy. Commercial vendors have started to release AI-based tools that can be readily integrated to the established clinical workflow. To show the recent progress in AI-aided radiotherapy, we have reviewed AI-based studies in five major aspects of radiotherapy including image reconstruction, image registration, image segmentation, image synthesis, and automatic treatment planning. In each section, we summarized and categorized the recently published methods, followed by a discussion of the challenges, concerns, and future development. Given the rapid development of AI-aided radiotherapy, the efficiency and effectiveness of radiotherapy in the future could be substantially improved through intelligent automation of various aspects of radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yabo Fu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
| | - Hao Zhang
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Eric D. Morris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Carri K. Glide-Hurst
- Department of Human Oncology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53792, USA
| | - Suraj Pai
- Maastricht University Medical Centre, Netherlands
| | | | - Leonard Wee
- Maastricht University Medical Centre, Netherlands
| | | | - Per-Ivar Lønne
- Department of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4953 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway
| | - Chenyang Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75002, USA
| | - Tian Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
| | - Xiaofeng Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Momin S, Fu Y, Lei Y, Roper J, Bradley JD, Curran WJ, Liu T, Yang X. Knowledge-based radiation treatment planning: A data-driven method survey. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 22:16-44. [PMID: 34231970 PMCID: PMC8364264 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Revised: 04/26/2021] [Accepted: 06/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper surveys the data-driven dose prediction methods investigated for knowledge-based planning (KBP) in the last decade. These methods were classified into two major categories-traditional KBP methods and deep-learning (DL) methods-according to their techniques of utilizing previous knowledge. Traditional KBP methods include studies that require geometric or anatomical features to either find the best-matched case(s) from a repository of prior treatment plans or to build dose prediction models. DL methods include studies that train neural networks to make dose predictions. A comprehensive review of each category is presented, highlighting key features, methods, and their advancements over the years. We separated the cited works according to the framework and cancer site in each category. Finally, we briefly discuss the performance of both traditional KBP methods and DL methods, then discuss future trends of both data-driven KBP methods to dose prediction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shadab Momin
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Yabo Fu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Yang Lei
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Justin Roper
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Jeffrey D. Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Walter J. Curran
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Tian Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| | - Xiaofeng Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaGAUSA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Han EY, Cardenas CE, Nguyen C, Hancock D, Xiao Y, Mumme R, Court LE, Rhee DJ, Netherton TJ, Li J, Yeboa DN, Wang C, Briere TM, Balter P, Martel MK, Wen Z. Clinical implementation of automated treatment planning for whole-brain radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 22:94-102. [PMID: 34250715 PMCID: PMC8425887 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13350] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2021] [Revised: 05/19/2021] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to develop and clinically deploy an automated, deep learning‐based approach to treatment planning for whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT). We collected CT images and radiotherapy treatment plans to automate a beam aperture definition from 520 patients who received WBRT. These patients were split into training (n = 312), cross‐validation (n = 104), and test (n = 104) sets which were used to train and evaluate a deep learning model. The DeepLabV3+ architecture was trained to automatically define the beam apertures on lateral‐opposed fields using digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs). For the beam aperture evaluation, 1st quantitative analysis was completed using a test set before clinical deployment and 2nd quantitative analysis was conducted 90 days after clinical deployment. The mean surface distance and the Hausdorff distances were compared in the anterior‐inferior edge between the clinically used and the predicted fields. Clinically used plans and deep‐learning generated plans were evaluated by various dose–volume histogram metrics of brain, cribriform plate, and lens. The 1st quantitative analysis showed that the average mean surface distance and Hausdorff distance were 7.1 mm (±3.8 mm) and 11.2 mm (±5.2 mm), respectively, in the anterior–inferior edge of the field. The retrospective dosimetric comparison showed that brain dose coverage (D99%, D95%, D1%) of the automatically generated plans was 29.7, 30.3, and 32.5 Gy, respectively, and the average dose of both lenses was up to 19.0% lower when compared to the clinically used plans. Following the clinical deployment, the 2nd quantitative analysis showed that the average mean surface distance and Hausdorff distance between the predicted and clinically used fields were 2.6 mm (±3.2 mm) and 4.5 mm (±5.6 mm), respectively. In conclusion, the automated patient‐specific treatment planning solution for WBRT was implemented in our clinic. The predicted fields appeared consistent with clinically used fields and the predicted plans were dosimetrically comparable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eun Young Han
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Carlos E Cardenas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Callistus Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Donald Hancock
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Yao Xiao
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Raymond Mumme
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Laurence E Court
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Dong Joo Rhee
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tucker J Netherton
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Debra Nana Yeboa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Chenyang Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tina M Briere
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Peter Balter
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mary K Martel
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Zhifei Wen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hoag Hospital, Newport Beach, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bai P, Weng X, Quan K, Chen J, Dai Y, Xu Y, Lin F, Zhong J, Wu T, Chen C. A knowledge-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning technique for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:188. [PMID: 32746873 PMCID: PMC7397573 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01626-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/21/2020] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background To investigate the feasibility of a knowledge-based automated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning technique for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) radiotherapy. Methods One hundred forty NPC patients treated with definitive radiation therapy with the step-and-shoot IMRT techniques were retrospectively selected and separated into a knowledge library (n = 115) and a test library (n = 25). For each patient in the knowledge library, the overlap volume histogram (OVH), target volume histogram (TVH) and dose objectives were extracted from the manually generated plan. 5-fold cross validation was performed to divide the patients in the knowledge library into 5 groups before validating one group by using the other 4 groups to train each neural network (NN) machine learning models. For patients in the test library, their OVH and TVH were then used by the trained models to predict a corresponding set of mean dose objectives, which were subsequently used to generate automated plans (APs) in Pinnacle planning system via an in-house developed automated scripting system. All APs were obtained after a single step of optimization. Manual plans (MPs) for the test patients were generated by an experienced medical physicist strictly following the established clinical protocols. The qualities of the APs and MPs were evaluated by an attending radiation oncologist. The dosimetric parameters for planning target volume (PTV) coverage and the organs-at-risk (OAR) sparing were also quantitatively measured and compared using Mann-Whitney U test and Bonferroni correction. Results APs and MPs had the same rating for more than 80% of the patients (19 out of 25) in the test group. Both AP and MP achieved PTV coverage criteria for no less than 80% of the patients. For each OAR, the number of APs achieving its criterion was similar to that in the MPs. The AP approach improved planning efficiency by greatly reducing the planning duration to about 17% of the MP (9.85 ± 1.13 min vs. 57.10 ± 6.35 min). Conclusion A robust and effective knowledge-based IMRT treatment planning technique for locally advanced NPC is developed. Patient specific dose objectives can be predicted by trained NN models based on the individual’s OVH and clinical TVH goals. The automated planning scripts can use these dose objectives to efficiently generate APs with largely shortened planning time. These APs had comparable dosimetric qualities when compared to our clinic’s manual plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penggang Bai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Xing Weng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Kerun Quan
- School of Nuclear Science and Technology, University of South China, Hengyang, China
| | - Jihong Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Yitao Dai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Yuanji Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Fasheng Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Jing Zhong
- Department of Radiology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
| | - Tianming Wu
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, USA
| | - Chuanben Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ge Y, Wu QJ. Knowledge-based planning for intensity-modulated radiation therapy: A review of data-driven approaches. Med Phys 2019; 46:2760-2775. [PMID: 30963580 PMCID: PMC6561807 DOI: 10.1002/mp.13526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 128] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2017] [Revised: 01/15/2019] [Accepted: 03/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Intensity‐Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), including its variations (including IMRT, Volumetric Arc Therapy (VMAT), and Tomotherapy), is a widely used and critically important technology for cancer treatment. It is a knowledge‐intensive technology due not only to its own technical complexity, but also to the inherently conflicting nature of maximizing tumor control while minimizing normal organ damage. As IMRT experience and especially the carefully designed clinical plan data are accumulated during the past two decades, a new set of methods commonly termed knowledge‐based planning (KBP) have been developed that aim to improve the quality and efficiency of IMRT planning by learning from the database of past clinical plans. Some of this development has led to commercial products recently that allowed the investigation of KBP in numerous clinical applications. In this literature review, we will attempt to present a summary of published methods of knowledge‐based approaches in IMRT and recent clinical validation results. Methods In March 2018, a literature search was conducted in the NIH Medline database using the PubMed interface to identify publications that describe methods and validations related to KBP in IMRT including variations such as VMAT and Tomotherapy. The search criteria were designed to have a broad scope to capture relevant results with high sensitivity. The authors filtered down the search results according to a predefined selection criteria by reviewing the titles and abstracts first and then by reviewing the full text. A few papers were added to the list based on the references of the reviewed papers. The final set of papers was reviewed and summarized here. Results The initial search yielded a total of 740 articles. A careful review of the titles, abstracts, and eventually the full text and then adding relevant articles from reviewing the references resulted in a final list of 73 articles published between 2011 and early 2018. These articles described methods for developing knowledge models for predicting such parameters as dosimetric and dose‐volume points, voxel‐level doses, and objective function weights that improve or automate IMRT planning for various cancer sites, addressing different clinical and quality assurance needs, and using a variety of machine learning approaches. A number of articles reported carefully designed clinical studies that assessed the performance of KBP models in realistic clinical applications. Overwhelming majority of the studies demonstrated the benefits of KBP in achieving comparable and often improved quality of IMRT planning while reducing planning time and plan quality variation. Conclusions The number of KBP‐related studies has been steadily increasing since 2011 indicating a growing interest in applying this approach to clinical applications. Validation studies have generally shown KBP to produce plans with quality comparable to expert planners while reducing the time and efforts to generate plans. However, current studies are mostly retrospective and leverage relatively small datasets. Larger datasets collected through multi‐institutional collaboration will enable the development of more advanced models to further improve the performance of KBP in complex clinical cases. Prospective studies will be an important next step toward widespread adoption of this exciting technology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yaorong Ge
- Department of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, 28223, USA
| | - Q Jackie Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 27710, USA
| |
Collapse
|