Literature DB >> 22864012

Impact of the accuracy of automatic tumour functional volume delineation on radiotherapy treatment planning.

Amandine Le Maitre1, Mathieu Hatt, Olivier Pradier, Catherine Cheze-le Rest, Dimitris Visvikis.   

Abstract

Over the past few years several automatic and semi-automatic PET segmentation methods for target volume definition in radiotherapy have been proposed. The objective of this study is to compare different methods in terms of dosimetry. For such a comparison, a gold standard is needed. For this purpose, realistic GATE-simulated PET images were used. Three lung cases and three H&N cases were designed with various shapes, contrasts and heterogeneities. Four different segmentation approaches were compared: fixed and adaptive thresholds, a fuzzy C-mean and the fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian method. For each of these target volumes, an IMRT treatment plan was defined. The different algorithms and resulting plans were compared in terms of segmentation errors and ground-truth volume coverage using different metrics (V(95), D(95), homogeneity index and conformity index). The major differences between the threshold-based methods and automatic methods occurred in the most heterogeneous cases. Within the two groups, the major differences occurred for low contrast cases. For homogeneous cases, equivalent ground-truth volume coverage was observed for all methods but for more heterogeneous cases, significantly lower coverage was observed for threshold-based methods. Our study demonstrates that significant dosimetry errors can be avoided by using more advanced image-segmentation methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22864012     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/57/17/5381

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  6 in total

1.  Potential of [18F]-fluoromisonidazole positron-emission tomography for radiotherapy planning in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas.

Authors:  B Henriques de Figueiredo; T Merlin; H de Clermont-Gallerande; M Hatt; D Vimont; P Fernandez; F Lamare
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 2.  A review on segmentation of positron emission tomography images.

Authors:  Brent Foster; Ulas Bagci; Awais Mansoor; Ziyue Xu; Daniel J Mollura
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 4.589

Review 3.  Introduction to the analysis of PET data in oncology.

Authors:  Giampaolo Tomasi; Eric O Aboagye
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  The use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in radiation therapy: a phantom study for setting internal target volume of biological target volume.

Authors:  Wataru Kawakami; Akihiro Takemura; Kunihiko Yokoyama; Kenichi Nakajima; Syoichi Yokoyama; Kichiro Koshida
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Toward a standard for the evaluation of PET-Auto-Segmentation methods following the recommendations of AAPM task group No. 211: Requirements and implementation.

Authors:  Beatrice Berthon; Emiliano Spezi; Paulina Galavis; Tony Shepherd; Aditya Apte; Mathieu Hatt; Hadi Fayad; Elisabetta De Bernardi; Chiara D Soffientini; C Ross Schmidtlein; Issam El Naqa; Robert Jeraj; Wei Lu; Shiva Das; Habib Zaidi; Osama R Mawlawi; Dimitris Visvikis; John A Lee; Assen S Kirov
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-07-02       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  A novel phantom technique for evaluating the performance of PET auto-segmentation methods in delineating heterogeneous and irregular lesions.

Authors:  B Berthon; C Marshall; R Holmes; E Spezi
Journal:  EJNMMI Phys       Date:  2015-06-27
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.