International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024
Deep Learning for Automatic Gross Tumor Volumes Contouring in Esophageal Cancer Based on Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography Images: A Multi-Institutional Study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Zhang Shuaitong, Li Kunwei, Sun Yuchen, Wan Yun, Ao Yong, Zhong Yinghua, Liang Mingzhu, Wang Lizhu, Chen Xiangmeng, Pei Xiaofeng, Hu Yi, Chen Duanduan, Li Man, Shan Hong
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To develop and externally validate an automatic artificial intelligence (AI) tool for delineating gross tumor volume (GTV) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), which can assist in neo-adjuvant or radical radiation therapy treatment planning.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this multi-institutional study, contrast-enhanced CT images from 580 eligible ESCC patients were retrospectively collected. The GTV contours delineated by 2 experts via consensus were used as ground truth. A 3-dimensional deep learning model was developed for GTV contouring in the training cohort and internally and externally validated in 3 validation cohorts. The AI tool was compared against 12 board-certified experts in 25 patients randomly selected from the external validation cohort to evaluate its assistance in improving contouring performance and reducing variation. Contouring performance was measured using dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and average surface distance. Additionally, our previously established radiomics model for predicting pathologic complete response was used to compare AI-generated and ground truth contours, to assess the potential of the AI contouring tool in radiomics analysis.
RESULTS: The AI tool demonstrated good GTV contouring performance in multicenter validation cohorts, with median DSC values of 0.865, 0.876, and 0.866 and median average surface distance values of 0.939, 0.789, and 0.875 mm, respectively. Furthermore, the AI tool significantly improved contouring performance for half of 12 board-certified experts (DSC values, 0.794-0.835 vs 0.856-0.881, P = .003-0.048), reduced the intra- and interobserver variations by 37.4% and 55.2%, respectively, and saved contouring time by 77.6%. In the radiomics analysis, 88.7% of radiomic features from ground truth and AI-generated contours demonstrated stable reproducibility, and similar pathologic complete response prediction performance for these contours (P = .430) was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our AI contouring tool can improve GTV contouring performance and facilitate radiomics analysis in ESCC patients, which indicates its potential for GTV contouring during radiation therapy treatment planning and radiomics studies.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this multi-institutional study, contrast-enhanced CT images from 580 eligible ESCC patients were retrospectively collected. The GTV contours delineated by 2 experts via consensus were used as ground truth. A 3-dimensional deep learning model was developed for GTV contouring in the training cohort and internally and externally validated in 3 validation cohorts. The AI tool was compared against 12 board-certified experts in 25 patients randomly selected from the external validation cohort to evaluate its assistance in improving contouring performance and reducing variation. Contouring performance was measured using dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and average surface distance. Additionally, our previously established radiomics model for predicting pathologic complete response was used to compare AI-generated and ground truth contours, to assess the potential of the AI contouring tool in radiomics analysis.
RESULTS: The AI tool demonstrated good GTV contouring performance in multicenter validation cohorts, with median DSC values of 0.865, 0.876, and 0.866 and median average surface distance values of 0.939, 0.789, and 0.875 mm, respectively. Furthermore, the AI tool significantly improved contouring performance for half of 12 board-certified experts (DSC values, 0.794-0.835 vs 0.856-0.881, P = .003-0.048), reduced the intra- and interobserver variations by 37.4% and 55.2%, respectively, and saved contouring time by 77.6%. In the radiomics analysis, 88.7% of radiomic features from ground truth and AI-generated contours demonstrated stable reproducibility, and similar pathologic complete response prediction performance for these contours (P = .430) was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our AI contouring tool can improve GTV contouring performance and facilitate radiomics analysis in ESCC patients, which indicates its potential for GTV contouring during radiation therapy treatment planning and radiomics studies.