Radiography (London, England : 1995) · 2025
Inter-observer variation in radiation oncology contouring: A scoping review of contour comparison methods, and reporting of impact on the organ at risk plan dose variations.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chamunyonga C, Mengersen K, Hargrave C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Inaccuracies in target and organs at risk (OAR) contouring can cause dosimetric uncertainties. This scoping review assessed the use of geometric indices (GIs) in evaluating contouring accuracy and reporting OAR dose variations.
KEY FINDINGS: Twenty-five (25) full-text articles were included in this review, comprising 22 primary studies and 3 review papers. Most studies focused on evaluating auto-segmentation tools (n = 9). The Dice similarity coefficient (DICE) and Hausdorff distances (HDs) were the most commonly used GIs for contour comparisons. OAR dose variations were primarily assessed using dose-volume histogram metrics, particularly the mean OAR dose, with some studies also employing radiobiological metrics such as normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) and equivalent uniform doses (EUDs). Statistical methods, such as Spearman's and Pearson's correlations and linear regression, were frequently used to examine relationships between GI values and dose variation.
CONCLUSION: Future inter-observer variation studies should include thorough reporting of treatment planning parameters that might affect optimisation, calculation, and dose reporting to enable comparison of results across studies.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The article highlights the need for standardisation in reporting dose variations. It also provides researchers and clinicians with insight into current practices in the use of geometric indices and statistical methods for evaluating contouring variation.
KEY FINDINGS: Twenty-five (25) full-text articles were included in this review, comprising 22 primary studies and 3 review papers. Most studies focused on evaluating auto-segmentation tools (n = 9). The Dice similarity coefficient (DICE) and Hausdorff distances (HDs) were the most commonly used GIs for contour comparisons. OAR dose variations were primarily assessed using dose-volume histogram metrics, particularly the mean OAR dose, with some studies also employing radiobiological metrics such as normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) and equivalent uniform doses (EUDs). Statistical methods, such as Spearman's and Pearson's correlations and linear regression, were frequently used to examine relationships between GI values and dose variation.
CONCLUSION: Future inter-observer variation studies should include thorough reporting of treatment planning parameters that might affect optimisation, calculation, and dose reporting to enable comparison of results across studies.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The article highlights the need for standardisation in reporting dose variations. It also provides researchers and clinicians with insight into current practices in the use of geometric indices and statistical methods for evaluating contouring variation.