Automatic segmentation of clinical target volume for radiation therapy in breast-conserving patients and exploration of clinical factors influential to its performance.

IF 3.4 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Maochen Zhang, Yibin Zhang, Lu Cao, Rong Cai, Haoping Xu, Cheng Xu, Weiqi Xiong, Wei Zhang, Xinyi Wu, Jiayi Chen, Gang Cai
{"title":"Automatic segmentation of clinical target volume for radiation therapy in breast-conserving patients and exploration of clinical factors influential to its performance.","authors":"Maochen Zhang, Yibin Zhang, Lu Cao, Rong Cai, Haoping Xu, Cheng Xu, Weiqi Xiong, Wei Zhang, Xinyi Wu, Jiayi Chen, Gang Cai","doi":"10.1093/bjr/tqag036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To develop and validate a deep learning model for whole breast clinical target volume (CTV) contouring and evaluate clinical features affecting its performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five datasets with 857 patients from a single center were used. Dataset 1 (n = 300) trained and tested the model. Dataset 2 (n = 10) evaluated contouring time and dosimetric parameters. Datasets 3 (n = 20) and 4 (n = 10) were for clinical evaluation. Dataset 5 (n = 517) identified clinical factors influencing auto-contouring accuracy. Model performance was assessed using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and 95th percentile Hausdorff Distance (HD95).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median DSC and HD95 for left- and right-sided models in Dataset 1 were 0.941, 1.75 mm and 0.937, 2.47 mm, respectively. In Dataset 2, both auto-contouring and auto-contouring with manual corrections were significantly faster than manual contouring (P = .005 for both), while still achieving clinically acceptable dosimetric results. In Dataset 3, two physicians rated automatic and manual contours as equivalent (P = .214, P = .075), while the other rated auto-contouring higher (P < .001). In Dataset 4, the auto-contouring model outperformed 1/5 physicians by DSC (P = .009) and 3/5 by HD95 (P = .015, P = .007, P = .017). In Dataset 5, peripheral tumor-bed and low-density breast tissue were associated with lower DSC (P < .001 for both) and higher HD95 (P < .001 for both). Cases without unfavorable factors performed better than those with (P < .001 for both).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The proposed model demonstrated acceptable accuracy, consistency, and efficiency in breast CTV contouring. Peripheral tumor-bed and low-density breast tissue reduced auto-contouring performance.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>The characteristics of challenging cases in whole breast CTV auto-contouring should be identified.</p>","PeriodicalId":9306,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"942-950"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13134858/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqag036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To develop and validate a deep learning model for whole breast clinical target volume (CTV) contouring and evaluate clinical features affecting its performance.

Methods: Five datasets with 857 patients from a single center were used. Dataset 1 (n = 300) trained and tested the model. Dataset 2 (n = 10) evaluated contouring time and dosimetric parameters. Datasets 3 (n = 20) and 4 (n = 10) were for clinical evaluation. Dataset 5 (n = 517) identified clinical factors influencing auto-contouring accuracy. Model performance was assessed using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and 95th percentile Hausdorff Distance (HD95).

Results: The median DSC and HD95 for left- and right-sided models in Dataset 1 were 0.941, 1.75 mm and 0.937, 2.47 mm, respectively. In Dataset 2, both auto-contouring and auto-contouring with manual corrections were significantly faster than manual contouring (P = .005 for both), while still achieving clinically acceptable dosimetric results. In Dataset 3, two physicians rated automatic and manual contours as equivalent (P = .214, P = .075), while the other rated auto-contouring higher (P < .001). In Dataset 4, the auto-contouring model outperformed 1/5 physicians by DSC (P = .009) and 3/5 by HD95 (P = .015, P = .007, P = .017). In Dataset 5, peripheral tumor-bed and low-density breast tissue were associated with lower DSC (P < .001 for both) and higher HD95 (P < .001 for both). Cases without unfavorable factors performed better than those with (P < .001 for both).

Conclusions: The proposed model demonstrated acceptable accuracy, consistency, and efficiency in breast CTV contouring. Peripheral tumor-bed and low-density breast tissue reduced auto-contouring performance.

Advances in knowledge: The characteristics of challenging cases in whole breast CTV auto-contouring should be identified.

保乳患者放射治疗临床靶体积自动分割及临床影响因素探讨
目的:开发并验证全乳临床靶体积(CTV)轮廓的深度学习模型,并评估影响其性能的临床特征。方法:使用来自单个中心的5个数据集,共857例患者。数据集1 (n = 300)训练并测试了模型。数据集2 (n = 10)评估了等值时间和剂量学参数。数据集3 (n = 20)和4 (n = 10)用于临床评价。数据集5 (n = 517)确定了影响自动轮廓准确性的临床因素。采用骰子相似系数(DSC)和第95百分位豪斯多夫距离(HD95)评估模型性能。结果:数据集1中左侧和右侧模型的DSC和HD95的中位数分别为0.941、1.75 mm和0.937、2.47 mm。在数据集2中,自动轮廓和手动校正的自动轮廓都明显快于手动轮廓(P = 0.005),同时仍然达到临床可接受的剂量学结果。在数据集3中,两名医生认为自动轮廓和手动轮廓相当(P = 0.214, P = 0.075),而另一名医生认为自动轮廓更高(P)。结论:提出的模型在乳房CTV轮廓中显示出可接受的准确性、一致性和效率。周围肿瘤床和低密度乳腺组织降低了自动轮廓的性能。知识的进步:全乳CTV自动轮廓的难点病例的特点应明确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Radiology
British Journal of Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
330
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: BJR is the international research journal of the British Institute of Radiology and is the oldest scientific journal in the field of radiology and related sciences. Dating back to 1896, BJR’s history is radiology’s history, and the journal has featured some landmark papers such as the first description of Computed Tomography "Computerized transverse axial tomography" by Godfrey Hounsfield in 1973. A valuable historical resource, the complete BJR archive has been digitized from 1896. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor – 1.840 - Receipt to first decision – average of 6 weeks - Acceptance to online publication – average of 3 weeks - ISSN: 0007-1285 - eISSN: 1748-880X Open Access option
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书