Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37177830›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2023

Deep learning-based classification of organs at risk and delineation guideline in pelvic cancer radiation therapy.

Michael Lempart, Jonas Scherman, Martin P Nilsson, Christian Jamtheim Gustafsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael LempartRadiation Physics, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Jonas SchermanRadiation Physics, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Martin P NilssonDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Christian Jamtheim GustafssonRadiation Physics, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2931-5615
Lund University · SESkåne University Hospital · SE

Funding

Swedish VINNOVA 2019-04735
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning (DL) models for radiation therapy (RT) image segmentation require accurately annotated training data. Multiple organ delineation guidelines exist; however, information on the used guideline is not provided with the delineation. Extraction of training data with coherent guidelines can therefore be challenging. We present a supervised classification method for pelvis structure delineations where bowel cavity, femoral heads, bladder, and rectum data, with two guidelines, were classified. The impact on DL-based segmentation quality using mixed guideline training data was also demonstrated. Bowel cavity was manually delineated on CT images for anal cancer patients (n = 170) according to guidelines Devisetty and RTOG. The DL segmentation quality from using training data with coherent or mixed guidelines was investigated. A supervised 3D squeeze-and-excite SENet-154 model was trained to classify two bowel cavity delineation guidelines. In addition, a pelvis CT dataset with manual delineations from prostate cancer patients (n = 1854) was used where data with an alternative guideline for femoral heads, rectum, and bladder were generated using commercial software. The model was evaluated on internal (n = 200) and external test data (n = 99). By using mixed, compared to coherent, delineation guideline training data mean DICE score decreased 3% units, mean Hausdorff distance (95%) increased 5 mm and mean surface distance (MSD) increased 1 mm. The classification of bowel cavity test data achieved 99.8% unweighted classification accuracy, 99.9% macro average precision, 97.2% macro average recall, and 98.5% macro average F1. Corresponding metrics for the pelvis internal test data were all 99% or above and for the external pelvis test data they were 96.3%, 96.6%, 93.3%, and 94.6%. Impaired segmentation performance was observed for training data with mixed guidelines. The DL delineation classification models achieved excellent results on internal and external test data. This can facilitate automated guideline-specific data extraction while avoiding the need for consistent and correct structure labels.

Indexed as

Deep LearningPelvic NeoplasmsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleOrgans at RiskPelvisUrinary Bladderdeep learningguidelineorgans at riskradiation therapystructure classification

Identifiers

PMID37177830
PMCPMC10476996
OpenAlexW4376598142

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.