Evaluation of deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation algorithms for delineating clinical target volume and organs at risk involving data for 125 cervical cancer patients. Issue 12 (25th November 2020)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Evaluation of deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation algorithms for delineating clinical target volume and organs at risk involving data for 125 cervical cancer patients. Issue 12 (25th November 2020)
- Main Title:
- Evaluation of deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation algorithms for delineating clinical target volume and organs at risk involving data for 125 cervical cancer patients
- Authors:
- Wang, Zhi
Chang, Yankui
Peng, Zhao
Lv, Yin
Shi, Weijiong
Wang, Fan
Pei, Xi
Xu, X. George - Abstract:
- Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of a deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation mode to that of manual contouring by one medical resident, where both entities tried to mimic the delineation "habits" of the same clinical senior physician. Methods: This study included 125 cervical cancer patients whose clinical target volumes (CTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) were delineated by the same senior physician. Of these 125 cases, 100 were used for model training and the remaining 25 for model testing. In addition, the medical resident instructed by the senior physician for approximately 8 months delineated the CTVs and OARs for the testing cases. The dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the Hausdorff Distance (HD) were used to evaluate the delineation accuracy for CTV, bladder, rectum, small intestine, femoral‐head‐left, and femoral‐head‐right. Results: The DSC values of the auto‐segmentation model and manual contouring by the resident were, respectively, 0.86 and 0.83 for the CTV ( P < 0.05), 0.91 and 0.91 for the bladder ( P > 0.05), 0.88 and 0.84 for the femoral‐head‐right ( P < 0.05), 0.88 and 0.84 for the femoral‐head‐left ( P < 0.05), 0.86 and 0.81 for the small intestine ( P < 0.05), and 0.81 and 0.84 for the rectum ( P > 0.05). The HD (mm) values were, respectively, 14.84 and 18.37 for the CTV ( P < 0.05), 7.82 and 7.63 for the bladder ( P > 0.05), 6.18 and 6.75 for the femoral‐head‐right ( P > 0.05), 6.17 and 6.31 for the femoral‐head‐left ( P > 0.05),Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of a deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation mode to that of manual contouring by one medical resident, where both entities tried to mimic the delineation "habits" of the same clinical senior physician. Methods: This study included 125 cervical cancer patients whose clinical target volumes (CTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) were delineated by the same senior physician. Of these 125 cases, 100 were used for model training and the remaining 25 for model testing. In addition, the medical resident instructed by the senior physician for approximately 8 months delineated the CTVs and OARs for the testing cases. The dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the Hausdorff Distance (HD) were used to evaluate the delineation accuracy for CTV, bladder, rectum, small intestine, femoral‐head‐left, and femoral‐head‐right. Results: The DSC values of the auto‐segmentation model and manual contouring by the resident were, respectively, 0.86 and 0.83 for the CTV ( P < 0.05), 0.91 and 0.91 for the bladder ( P > 0.05), 0.88 and 0.84 for the femoral‐head‐right ( P < 0.05), 0.88 and 0.84 for the femoral‐head‐left ( P < 0.05), 0.86 and 0.81 for the small intestine ( P < 0.05), and 0.81 and 0.84 for the rectum ( P > 0.05). The HD (mm) values were, respectively, 14.84 and 18.37 for the CTV ( P < 0.05), 7.82 and 7.63 for the bladder ( P > 0.05), 6.18 and 6.75 for the femoral‐head‐right ( P > 0.05), 6.17 and 6.31 for the femoral‐head‐left ( P > 0.05), 22.21 and 26.70 for the small intestine ( P > 0.05), and 7.04 and 6.13 for the rectum ( P > 0.05). The auto‐segmentation model took approximately 2 min to delineate the CTV and OARs while the resident took approximately 90 min to complete the same task. Conclusion: The auto‐segmentation model was as accurate as the medical resident but with much better efficiency in this study. Furthermore, the auto‐segmentation approach offers additional perceivable advantages of being consistent and ever improving when compared with manual approaches. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 21:Issue 12(2020)
- Journal:
- Journal of applied clinical medical physics
- Issue:
- Volume 21:Issue 12(2020)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 21, Issue 12 (2020)
- Year:
- 2020
- Volume:
- 21
- Issue:
- 12
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2020-0021-0012-0000
- Page Start:
- 272
- Page End:
- 279
- Publication Date:
- 2020-11-25
- Subjects:
- auto‐segmentation -- clinical target volumes -- deep learning -- organs at risk
Medical physics -- Periodicals
Clinical medicine -- Periodicals
Health Physics
Clinical Medicine
Electronic journals
Periodicals
Periodicals
Fulltext
Internet Resources
610.153 - Journal URLs:
- http://aapm.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1526-9914/ ↗
http://bibpurl.oclc.org/web/7294 ↗
http://www.jacmp.org/ ↗
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1002/acm2.13097 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1526-9914
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 22055.xml