编辑临床轮廓对深度学习分割胶质母细胞瘤总肿瘤体积准确性的影响

IF 3.4 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Kim M. Hochreuter , Jintao Ren , Jasper Nijkamp , Stine S. Korreman , Slávka Lukacova , Jesper F. Kallehauge , Anouk K. Trip
{"title":"编辑临床轮廓对深度学习分割胶质母细胞瘤总肿瘤体积准确性的影响","authors":"Kim M. Hochreuter ,&nbsp;Jintao Ren ,&nbsp;Jasper Nijkamp ,&nbsp;Stine S. Korreman ,&nbsp;Slávka Lukacova ,&nbsp;Jesper F. Kallehauge ,&nbsp;Anouk K. Trip","doi":"10.1016/j.phro.2024.100620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><p>Deep-learning (DL) models for segmentation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) in radiotherapy are generally based on clinical delineations which suffer from inter-observer variability. The aim of this study was to compare performance of a DL-model based on clinical glioblastoma GTVs to a model based on a single-observer edited version of the same GTVs.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>The dataset included imaging data (Computed Tomography (CT), T1, contrast-T1 (T1C), and fluid-attenuated-inversion-recovery (FLAIR)) of 259 glioblastoma patients treated with post-operative radiotherapy between 2012 and 2019 at a single institute. The clinical GTVs were edited using all imaging data. The dataset was split into 207 cases for training/validation and 52 for testing.</p><p>GTV segmentation models (nnUNet) were trained on clinical and edited GTVs separately and compared using Surface Dice with 1 mm tolerance (sDSC<sub>1mm</sub>). We also evaluated model performance with respect to extent of resection (EOR), and different imaging combinations (T1C/T1/FLAIR/CT, T1C/FLAIR/CT, T1C/FLAIR, T1C/CT, T1C/T1, T1C). A Wilcoxon test was used for significance testing.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The median (range) sDSC<sub>1mm</sub> of the clinical-GTV-model and edited-GTV-model both evaluated with the edited contours, was 0.76 (0.43–0.94) vs. 0.92 (0.60–0.98) respectively (p &lt; 0.001). sDSC<sub>1mm</sub> was not significantly different between patients with a biopsy, partial, and complete resection. T1C as single input performed as good as use of imaging combinations.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>High segmentation accuracy was obtained by the DL-models. Editing of the clinical GTVs significantly increased DL performance with a relevant effect size. DL performance was robust for EOR and highly accurate using only T1C.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36850,"journal":{"name":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624000903/pdfft?md5=e88e04622fe9ccd80053c813dfb9b1cc&pid=1-s2.0-S2405631624000903-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of editing clinical contours on deep-learning segmentation accuracy of the gross tumor volume in glioblastoma\",\"authors\":\"Kim M. Hochreuter ,&nbsp;Jintao Ren ,&nbsp;Jasper Nijkamp ,&nbsp;Stine S. Korreman ,&nbsp;Slávka Lukacova ,&nbsp;Jesper F. Kallehauge ,&nbsp;Anouk K. Trip\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.phro.2024.100620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><p>Deep-learning (DL) models for segmentation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) in radiotherapy are generally based on clinical delineations which suffer from inter-observer variability. The aim of this study was to compare performance of a DL-model based on clinical glioblastoma GTVs to a model based on a single-observer edited version of the same GTVs.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>The dataset included imaging data (Computed Tomography (CT), T1, contrast-T1 (T1C), and fluid-attenuated-inversion-recovery (FLAIR)) of 259 glioblastoma patients treated with post-operative radiotherapy between 2012 and 2019 at a single institute. The clinical GTVs were edited using all imaging data. The dataset was split into 207 cases for training/validation and 52 for testing.</p><p>GTV segmentation models (nnUNet) were trained on clinical and edited GTVs separately and compared using Surface Dice with 1 mm tolerance (sDSC<sub>1mm</sub>). We also evaluated model performance with respect to extent of resection (EOR), and different imaging combinations (T1C/T1/FLAIR/CT, T1C/FLAIR/CT, T1C/FLAIR, T1C/CT, T1C/T1, T1C). A Wilcoxon test was used for significance testing.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The median (range) sDSC<sub>1mm</sub> of the clinical-GTV-model and edited-GTV-model both evaluated with the edited contours, was 0.76 (0.43–0.94) vs. 0.92 (0.60–0.98) respectively (p &lt; 0.001). sDSC<sub>1mm</sub> was not significantly different between patients with a biopsy, partial, and complete resection. T1C as single input performed as good as use of imaging combinations.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>High segmentation accuracy was obtained by the DL-models. Editing of the clinical GTVs significantly increased DL performance with a relevant effect size. DL performance was robust for EOR and highly accurate using only T1C.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624000903/pdfft?md5=e88e04622fe9ccd80053c813dfb9b1cc&pid=1-s2.0-S2405631624000903-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624000903\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624000903","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的在放疗中分割肿瘤总体积(GTV)的深度学习(DL)模型通常基于临床划线,而临床划线存在观察者之间的差异性。本研究的目的是比较基于临床胶质母细胞瘤 GTV 的 DL 模型与基于同一 GTV 的单个观察者编辑版本的模型的性能。材料与方法数据集包括 2012 年至 2019 年期间在一家研究所接受术后放疗的 259 例胶质母细胞瘤患者的成像数据(计算机断层扫描(CT)、T1、对比度-T1(T1C)和流体增强-反转恢复(FLAIR))。使用所有成像数据编辑了临床 GTV。GTV分割模型(nnUNet)在临床和编辑的GTV上分别进行了训练,并使用容差为1毫米的Surface Dice(sDSC1mm)进行了比较。我们还评估了模型在切除范围(EOR)和不同成像组合(T1C/T1/FLAIR/CT、T1C/FLAIR/CT、T1C/FLAIR、T1C/CT、T1C/T1、T1C)方面的性能。结果使用编辑轮廓评估的临床-GTV 模型和编辑-GTV 模型的 sDSC1mm 中位数(范围)分别为 0.76 (0.43-0.94) vs. 0.92 (0.60-0.98) (p<0.001)。结论DL模型获得了较高的分割准确性。对临床 GTV 进行编辑可显著提高 DL 性能,并具有相关的效应大小。仅使用 T1C 时,DL 对 EOR 性能稳健,准确度高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effect of editing clinical contours on deep-learning segmentation accuracy of the gross tumor volume in glioblastoma

Background and purpose

Deep-learning (DL) models for segmentation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) in radiotherapy are generally based on clinical delineations which suffer from inter-observer variability. The aim of this study was to compare performance of a DL-model based on clinical glioblastoma GTVs to a model based on a single-observer edited version of the same GTVs.

Materials and methods

The dataset included imaging data (Computed Tomography (CT), T1, contrast-T1 (T1C), and fluid-attenuated-inversion-recovery (FLAIR)) of 259 glioblastoma patients treated with post-operative radiotherapy between 2012 and 2019 at a single institute. The clinical GTVs were edited using all imaging data. The dataset was split into 207 cases for training/validation and 52 for testing.

GTV segmentation models (nnUNet) were trained on clinical and edited GTVs separately and compared using Surface Dice with 1 mm tolerance (sDSC1mm). We also evaluated model performance with respect to extent of resection (EOR), and different imaging combinations (T1C/T1/FLAIR/CT, T1C/FLAIR/CT, T1C/FLAIR, T1C/CT, T1C/T1, T1C). A Wilcoxon test was used for significance testing.

Results

The median (range) sDSC1mm of the clinical-GTV-model and edited-GTV-model both evaluated with the edited contours, was 0.76 (0.43–0.94) vs. 0.92 (0.60–0.98) respectively (p < 0.001). sDSC1mm was not significantly different between patients with a biopsy, partial, and complete resection. T1C as single input performed as good as use of imaging combinations.

Conclusions

High segmentation accuracy was obtained by the DL-models. Editing of the clinical GTVs significantly increased DL performance with a relevant effect size. DL performance was robust for EOR and highly accurate using only T1C.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology Physics and Astronomy-Radiation
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
18.90%
发文量
93
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信