Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical validation of commercial deep-learning based auto-segmentation models for organs at risk in the head and neck region: a single institution study.
Johnson, Casey L; Press, Robert H; Simone, Charles B; Shen, Brian; Tsai, Pingfang; Hu, Lei; Yu, Francis; Apinorasethkul, Chavanon; Ackerman, Christopher; Zhai, Huifang; Lin, Haibo; Huang, Sheng.
Afiliação
  • Johnson CL; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Press RH; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Simone CB; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Shen B; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Tsai P; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Hu L; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Yu F; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Apinorasethkul C; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Ackerman C; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Zhai H; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Lin H; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
  • Huang S; New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Front Oncol ; 14: 1375096, 2024.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39055552
ABSTRACT

Purpose:

To evaluate organ at risk (OAR) auto-segmentation in the head and neck region of computed tomography images using two different commercially available deep-learning-based auto-segmentation (DLAS) tools in a single institutional clinical applications.

Methods:

Twenty-two OARs were manually contoured by clinicians according to published guidelines on planning computed tomography (pCT) images for 40 clinical head and neck cancer (HNC) cases. Automatic contours were generated for each patient using two deep-learning-based auto-segmentation models-Manteia AccuContour and MIM ProtégéAI. The accuracy and integrity of autocontours (ACs) were then compared to expert contours (ECs) using the Sørensen-Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Mean Distance (MD) metrics.

Results:

ACs were generated for 22 OARs using AccuContour and 17 OARs using ProtégéAI with average contour generation time of 1 min/patient and 5 min/patient respectively. EC and AC agreement was highest for the mandible (DSC 0.90 ± 0.16) and (DSC 0.91 ± 0.03), and lowest for the chiasm (DSC 0.28 ± 0.14) and (DSC 0.30 ± 0.14) for AccuContour and ProtégéAI respectively. Using AccuContour, the average MD was<1mm for 10 of the 22 OARs contoured, 1-2mm for 6 OARs, and 2-3mm for 6 OARs. For ProtégéAI, the average mean distance was<1mm for 8 out of 17 OARs, 1-2mm for 6 OARs, and 2-3mm for 3 OARs.

Conclusions:

Both DLAS programs were proven to be valuable tools to significantly reduce the time required to generate large amounts of OAR contours in the head and neck region, even though manual editing of ACs is likely needed prior to implementation into treatment planning. The DSCs and MDs achieved were similar to those reported in other studies that evaluated various other DLAS solutions. Still, small volume structures with nonideal contrast in CT images, such as nerves, are very challenging and will require additional solutions to achieve sufficient results.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article