Assessment of fully-automated atlas-based segmentation of novel oral mucosal surface organ-at-risk. Issue 1 (April 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Dean, Jamie A.; Welsh, Liam C.; McQuaid, Dualta; Wong, Kee H.; Aleksic, Aleksandar; Dunne, Emma; Islam, Mohammad R.; Patel, Anushka; Patel, Priyanka; Petkar, Imran; Phillips, Iain; Sham, Jackie; Newbold, Kate L.; Bhide, Shreerang A.; Harrington, Kevin J.; Gulliford, Sarah L.; Nutting, Christopher M.
• Is Part Of: Radiotherapy and oncology. Volume 119:Issue 1(2016:Apr.)
• Page Start: 166
• Page End: 171
• Publication Date: 2016-04
• Subjects: Atlas-based segmentation -- Contouring -- Delineation -- OAR -- Oral mucosa -- Oral cavity; Oncology -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Tumors -- Periodicals; Medical Oncology -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Cancérologie -- Périodiques; Tumeurs -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 616.9940642
• DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.02.022
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0167-8140

Abstract

Abstract: Background and purpose: Current oral mucositis normal tissue complication probability models, based on the dose distribution to the oral cavity volume, have suboptimal predictive power. Improving the delineation of the oral mucosa is likely to improve these models, but is resource intensive. We developed and evaluated fully-automated atlas-based segmentation (ABS) of a novel delineation technique for the oral mucosal surfaces. Material and methods: An atlas of mucosal surface contours (MSC) consisting of 46 patients was developed. It was applied to an independent test cohort of 10 patients for whom manual segmentation of MSC structures, by three different clinicians, and conventional outlining of oral cavity contours (OCC), by an additional clinician, were also performed. Geometric comparisons were made using the dice similarity coefficient (DSC), validation index (VI) and Hausdorff distance (HD). Dosimetric comparisons were carried out using dose-volume histograms. Results: The median difference, in the DSC and HD, between automated-manual comparisons and manual-manual comparisons were small and non-significant (−0.024; p = 0.33 and −0.5; p = 0.88, respectively). The median VI was 0.086. The maximum normalised volume difference between automated and manual MSC structures across all of the dose levels, averaged over the test cohort, was 8%. This difference reached approximately 28% when comparing automated MSC and OCC structures. Conclusions: Fully-automated ABS of MSC is suitable for use in radiotherapy dose–response modelling.