ArticleMedical physics2025
Development of a defacing algorithm to protect the privacy of head and neck cancer patients in publicly-accessible radiotherapy datasets.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe increase in public medical imaging datasets has raised concerns about potential patient reidentification from head CT scans. However, existing defacing algorithms, which help protect patient confidentiality, fail to preserve critical radiotherapy structures, including organs at risk (OARs) and planning target volumes (PTVs) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Furthermore, current algorithms do not address the defacing of DICOM-RT structure set and dose data, which also contain information for facial surface rendering. PURPOSE: To develop and validate a novel automated defacing algorithm that preserves OARs and PTVs while removing identifiable features from HNC CTs and DICOM-RT data.
methodsEye contours were used as landmarks to automate the removal of CT pixels above the inferior-most slice of the eye and anterior to the midpoint of the eye. Pixels within PTVs were retained if they intersected with the removed region. The body contour and dose map were then reshaped to reflect the defaced image. We validated our approach on 829 HNC CT-simulation scans from 622 patients. To evaluate privacy protection, we applied the FaceNet512 facial recognition algorithm before and after defacing on 3D-rendered CT scan pairs from 70 patients at two time points. To assess research utility, we examined the impact of defacing on auto-contouring performance using LimbusAI and analyzed the locations of PTVs relative to the defaced regions.
resultsBefore defacing, the facial recognition algorithm matched 97% of patients' CT scans. After defacing, this rate dropped to just 4%. LimbusAI effectively auto-contoured organs in the defaced CTs, with perfect Dice scores of 1 for OARs below the defaced region, and mean Dice scores exceeding 0.95 for OARs on the same slices as the defaced region. PTV analysis revealed that 86% of PTVs were entirely below the cropped region, 9.1% were on the same slice as the crop without overlap, and only 4.9% extended into the cropped area. All overlapping PTVs were preserved through our algorithm's design.
conclusionsWe developed a novel defacing algorithm that anonymizes HNC CT scans and related DICOM-RT data. Our algorithm balances patient privacy while preserving essential structures for radiotherapy research, facilitating the sharing of HNC imaging datasets for Big Data and AI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.