Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34623738›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021

Deep learning-based classification and structure name standardization for organ at risk and target delineations in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Christian Jamtheim Gustafsson, Michael Lempart, Johan Swärd, Emilia Persson, Tufve Nyholm, Camilla Thellenberg Karlsson, Jonas Scherman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Christian Jamtheim GustafssonDepartment of Hematology Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Michael LempartDepartment of Hematology Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Johan SwärdCentre for Mathematical Sciences, Mathematical Statistics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Emilia PerssonDepartment of Hematology Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Tufve NyholmDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Camilla Thellenberg KarlssonDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Oncology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Jonas SchermanDepartment of Hematology Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.

Funding

Skåne University HospitalVINNOVA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiotherapy (RT) datasets can suffer from variations in annotation of organ at risk (OAR) and target structures. Annotation standards exist, but their description for prostate targets is limited. This restricts the use of such data for supervised machine learning purposes as it requires properly annotated data. The aim of this work was to develop a modality independent deep learning (DL) model for automatic classification and annotation of prostate RT DICOM structures. Delineated prostate organs at risk (OAR), support- and target structures (gross tumor volume [GTV]/clinical target volume [CTV]/planning target volume [PTV]), along with or without separate vesicles and/or lymph nodes, were extracted as binary masks from 1854 patients. An image modality independent 2D InceptionResNetV2 classification network was trained with varying amounts of training data using four image input channels. Channel 1-3 consisted of orthogonal 2D projections from each individual binary structure. The fourth channel contained a summation of the other available binary structure masks. Structure classification performance was assessed in independent CT (n = 200 pat) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (n = 40 pat) test datasets and an external CT (n = 99 pat) dataset from another clinic. A weighted classification accuracy of 99.4% was achieved during training. The unweighted classification accuracy and the weighted average F1 score among different structures in the CT test dataset were 98.8% and 98.4% and 98.6% and 98.5% for the MRI test dataset, respectively. The external CT dataset yielded the corresponding results 98.4% and 98.7% when analyzed for trained structures only, and results from the full dataset yielded 79.6% and 75.2%. Most misclassifications in the external CT dataset occurred due to multiple CTVs and PTVs being fused together, which was not included in the training data. Our proposed DL-based method for automated renaming and standardization of prostate radiotherapy annotations shows great potential. Clinic specific contouring standards however need to be represented in the training data for successful use. Source code is available at https://github.com/jamtheim/DicomRTStructRenamerPublic.

Indexed as

Deep LearningProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedReference Standardsclassificationdeep learningmachine learningradiotherapystructure

Identifiers

PMID34623738
PMCPMC8664152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.