Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31958147›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2020

Accuracy of deformable image registration techniques for alignment of longitudinal cholangiocarcinoma CT images.

Anando Sen, Brian M Anderson, Guillaume Cazoulat, Molly M McCulloch, Dalia Elganainy, Brigid A McDonald, Yulun He, Abdallah S R Mohamed, Baher A Elgohari, Mohamed Zaid and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anando SenDepartment of Imaging Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Brian M AndersonDepartment of Imaging Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Guillaume CazoulatDepartment of Imaging Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Molly M McCullochDepartment of Imaging Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Dalia ElganainyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Brigid A McDonaldDepartment of Radiation Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Yulun HeDepartment of Imaging Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Abdallah S R MohamedDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Baher A ElgohariDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Mohamed ZaidDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Eugene J KoayDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
Kristy K BrockDepartment of Imaging Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77054, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Optimization and Evaluation of Anatomical Models of Liver Radiation ResponseR01CA221971 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI BROCK, KRISTY · 2018 to 2022
$1.8M
Fellow and Resident Radiation Oncology iNtensive Training in Imaging and Informatics to Empower Research Careers (FRONTI2ER)R25EB025787 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI DAS, PRAJNAN, FULLER, CLIFTON DAVID · 2018 to 2022
$535k
Diffusion-Weighted Imaging-Based Adaptive Replanning for the MR-LinacF31DE029093 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI MCDONALD, BRIGID ANNE · 2019 to 2021
$91k
National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health -02National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health 5R01CA221971NCI NIH HHS R01 CA221971NIBIB NIH HHS R25 EB025787NIDCR NIH HHS F31 DE029093UT MD Anderson Cancer Center
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeResponse assessment of radiotherapy for the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) across longitudinal images is challenging due to anatomical changes. Advanced deformable image registration (DIR) techniques are required to correlate corresponding tissues across time. In this study, the accuracy of five commercially available DIR algorithms in four treatment planning systems (TPS) was investigated for the registration of planning images with posttreatment follow-up images for response assessment or re-treatment purposes.

methodsTwenty-nine IHCC patients treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy and with pretreatment and posttreatment contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) images were analyzed. Liver segmentations were semiautomatically generated on all CTs and the posttreatment CT was then registered to the pretreatment CT using five commercially available algorithms (Demons, B-splines, salient feature-based, anatomically constrained and finite element-based) in four TPSs. This was followed by an in-depth analysis of 10 DIR strategies (plus global and liver-focused rigid registration) in one of the TPSs. Eight of the strategies were variants of the anatomically constrained DIR while the two were based on a finite element-based biomechanical registration. The anatomically constrained techniques were combinations of: (a) initializations with the two rigid registrations; (b) two similarity metrics - correlation coefficient (CC) and mutual information (MI); and (c) with and without a controlling region of interest (ROI) - the liver. The finite element-based techniques were initialized by the two rigid registrations. The accuracy of each registration was evaluated using target registration error (TRE) based on identified vessel bifurcations. The results were statistically analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and pairwise comparison tests. Stratified analysis was conducted on the inter-TPS data (plus the liver-focused rigid registration) using treatment volume changes, slice thickness, time between scans, and abnormal lab values as stratifying factors.

resultsThe complex deformation observed following treatment resulted in average TRE exceeding the image voxel size for all techniques. For the inter-TPS comparison, the Demons algorithm had the lowest TRE, which was significantly superior to all the other algorithms. The respective mean (standard deviation) TRE (in mm) for the Demons, B-splines, salient feature-based, anatomically constrained, and finite element-based algorithms were 4.6 (2.0), 7.4 (2.7), 7.2 (2.6), 6.3 (2.3), and 7.5 (4.0). In the follow-up comparison of the anatomically constrained DIR, the strategy with liver-focused rigid registration initialization, CC as similarity metric and liver as a controlling ROI had the lowest mean TRE - 6.0 (2.0). The maximum TRE for all techniques exceeded 10 mm. Selection of DIR strategy was found to be a statistically significant factor for registration accuracy. Tumor volume change had a significant effect on TRE for finite element-based registration and B-splines DIR. Time between scans had a substantial effect on TRE for all registrations but was only significant for liver-focused rigid, finite element-based and salient feature-based DIRs.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates the limitations of commercially available DIR techniques in TPSs for alignment of longitudinal images of liver cancer presenting complex anatomical changes including local hypertrophy and fibrosis/necrosis. DIR in this setting should be used with caution and careful evaluation.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedBile Duct NeoplasmsCholangiocarcinomaFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle Agedbiomechanical registrationcholangiocarcinomadeformable image registrationliver cancertreatment planning systems

Identifiers

PMID31958147
PMCPMC7288249
OpenAlexW3001674311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.