Comparative clinical evaluation of atlas and deep-learning-based auto-segmentation of organ structures in liver cancer

被引:66
作者
Ahn, Sang Hee [1 ]
Yeo, Adam Unjin [2 ]
Kim, Kwang Hyeon [1 ]
Kim, Chankyu [1 ]
Goh, Youngmoon [3 ]
Cho, Shinhaeng [4 ]
Lee, Se Byeong [1 ]
Lim, Young Kyung [1 ]
Kim, Haksoo [1 ]
Shin, Dongho [1 ]
Kim, Taeyoon [1 ]
Kim, Tae Hyun [1 ]
Youn, Sang Hee [1 ]
Oh, Eun Sang [1 ]
Jeong, Jong Hwi [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Canc Ctr, Proton Therapy Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, 323 Ilsan Ro, Goyang Si 10408, Gyeonggi Do, South Korea
[2] Peter MacCallum Canc Ctr, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] Asan Med Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Seoul, South Korea
[4] Chonnam Natl Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Med Sch, Gwangju, South Korea
关键词
Contouring; Atlas-based auto-segmentation; Deep-learning-based auto-segmentation; Deep convolution neural network (DCNN); CT IMAGES; REGISTRATION; HEAD;
D O I
10.1186/s13014-019-1392-z
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background Accurate and standardized descriptions of organs at risk (OARs) are essential in radiation therapy for treatment planning and evaluation. Traditionally, physicians have contoured patient images manually, which, is time-consuming and subject to inter-observer variability. This study aims to a) investigate whether customized, deep-learning-based auto-segmentation could overcome the limitations of manual contouring and b) compare its performance against a typical, atlas-based auto-segmentation method organ structures in liver cancer. Methods On-contrast computer tomography image sets of 70 liver cancer patients were used, and four OARs (heart, liver, kidney, and stomach) were manually delineated by three experienced physicians as reference structures. Atlas and deep learning auto-segmentations were respectively performed with MIM Maestro 6.5 (MIM Software Inc., Cleveland, OH) and, with a deep convolution neural network (DCNN). The Hausdorff distance (HD) and, dice similarity coefficient (DSC), volume overlap error (VOE), and relative volume difference (RVD) were used to quantitatively evaluate the four different methods in the case of the reference set of the four OAR structures. Results The atlas-based method yielded the following average DSC and standard deviation values (SD) for the heart, liver, right kidney, left kidney, and stomach: 0.92 +/- 0.04 (DSC +/- SD), 0.93 +/- 0.02, 0.86 +/- 0.07, 0.85 +/- 0.11, and 0.60 +/- 0.13 respectively. The deep-learning-based method yielded corresponding values for the OARs of 0.94 +/- 0.01, 0.93 +/- 0.01, 0.88 +/- 0.03, 0.86 +/- 0.03, and 0.73 +/- 0.09. The segmentation results show that the deep learning framework is superior to the atlas-based framwork except in the case of the liver. Specifically, in the case of the stomach, the DSC, VOE, and RVD showed a maximum difference of 21.67, 25.11, 28.80% respectively. Conclusions In this study, we demonstrated that a deep learning framework could be used more effectively and efficiently compared to atlas-based auto-segmentation for most OARs in human liver cancer. Extended use of the deep-learning-based framework is anticipated for auto-segmentations of other body sites.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 13
页数:13
相关论文
共 38 条
  • [11] Ioffe S., 2015, P MACHINE LEARNING R, P448, DOI DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.1502.03167
  • [12] Jiang W., 2019, ARXIV190609745
  • [13] Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Radiation Therapy Outcomes: A Clinician's Perspective
    Kang, John
    Schwartz, Russell
    Flickinger, John
    Beriwal, Sushil
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2015, 93 (05): : 1127 - 1135
  • [14] An expert system for detection of breast cancer based on association rules and neural network
    Karabatak, Murat
    Ince, M. Cevdet
    [J]. EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2009, 36 (02) : 3465 - 3469
  • [15] Quantitative evaluation of image segmentation incorporating medical consideration functions
    Kim, Haksoo
    Monroe, James I.
    Lo, Simon
    Yao, Min
    Harari, Paul M.
    Machtay, Mitchell
    Sohn, Jason W.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3013 - 3023
  • [16] Kingma D.P., 2014, Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization,
  • [17] ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks
    Krizhevsky, Alex
    Sutskever, Ilya
    Hinton, Geoffrey E.
    [J]. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 2017, 60 (06) : 84 - 90
  • [18] Systematic evaluation of three different commercial software solutions for automatic segmentation for adaptive therapy in head-and-neck, prostate and pleural cancer
    La Macchia, Mariangela
    Fellin, Francesco
    Amichetti, Maurizio
    Cianchetti, Marco
    Gianolini, Stefano
    Paola, Vitali
    Lomax, Antony J.
    Widesott, Lamberto
    [J]. RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2012, 7
  • [19] Performance of commercially available deformable image registration platforms for contour propagation using patient-based computational phantoms: A multi-institutional study
    Loi, Gianfranco
    Fusella, Marco
    Lanzi, Eleonora
    Cagni, Elisabetta
    Garibaldi, Cristina
    Iacoviello, Giuseppina
    Lucio, Francesco
    Menghi, Enrico
    Miceli, Roberto
    Orlandini, Lucia C.
    Roggio, Antonella
    Rosica, Federica
    Stasi, Michele
    Strigari, Lidia
    Strolin, Silvia
    Fiandra, Christian
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (02) : 748 - 757
  • [20] Clinical evaluation of atlas and deep learning based automatic contouring for lung cancer
    Lustberg, Tim
    van Soest, Johan
    Gooding, Mark
    Peressutti, Devis
    Aljabar, Paul
    van der Stoep, Judith
    van Elmpt, Wouter
    Dekker, Andre
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2018, 126 (02) : 312 - 317