Literature DB >> 31901143

Implementation of the structural SIMilarity (SSIM) index as a quantitative evaluation tool for dose distribution error detection.

Jiayuan Peng1,2,3, Chengyu Shi4, Eric Laugeman3, Weigang Hu1,2, Zhen Zhang1,2, Sasa Mutic3, Bin Cai3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To apply an imaging metric of the structural SIMilarity (SSIM) index to the radiotherapy dose verification field and evaluate its capability to reveal the different types of errors between two dose distributions.
METHOD: The SSIM index consists of three sub-indices: luminance, contrast, and structure. Given two images, luminance analysis compares the local mean result, contrast analysis compares the local standard deviation, and the structure index represents the local Pearson correlation. Three test error patterns (absolute dose error, dose gradient error, and dose structure error) were designed to characterize the response of SSIM and its sub-indices and establish the correlation between the indices and different dose error types. After establishing the correlation, four radiotherapy plans (one MLC picket-fence test plan, one brain stereotactic radiotherapy plan, and two head-and-neck plans) were tested by computing each index and compared with the gamma analysis results to determine their similarities and differences.
RESULTS: Among the three test error patterns, the luminance index decreased from 1 to 0.1 when the absolute dose agreement fell from 100% to 5%, the contrast index decreased from 1 to 0.36 when the dose gradient agreement fell from 100% to 10%, and the structure index decreased from 1 to 0.23 when the periodical dose pattern shifted (leading to a lower correlation). Thus, the luminance, contrast and structure index can detect the absolute dose error, gradient discrepancy, and dose structure error, respectively. For the four clinical cases, the sub-indices can reveal the type of error when gamma analysis only provided limited information.
CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between the subcomponents of the SSIM index and the error types of the dose distribution were established. The SSIM index provides additional error information compared to that provided by gamma analysis.
© 2020 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  SSIM; dose distribution; quality assurance

Year:  2020        PMID: 31901143      PMCID: PMC7472642          DOI: 10.1002/mp.14010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  20 in total

1.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity.

Authors:  Zhou Wang; Alan Conrad Bovik; Hamid Rahim Sheikh; Eero P Simoncelli
Journal:  IEEE Trans Image Process       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 10.856

2.  Characterization and use of EBT radiochromic film for IMRT dose verification.

Authors:  Omar A Zeidan; Stacy Ann L Stephenson; Sanford L Meeks; Thomas H Wagner; Twyla R Willoughby; Patrick A Kupelian; Katja M Langen
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Error in the delivery of radiation therapy: results of a quality assurance review.

Authors:  Grace Huang; Gaylene Medlam; Justin Lee; Susan Billingsley; Jean-Pierre Bissonnette; Jolie Ringash; Gabrielle Kane; David C Hodgson
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2005-04-01       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Per-beam, planar IMRT QA passing rates do not predict clinically relevant patient dose errors.

Authors:  Benjamin E Nelms; Heming Zhen; Wolfgang A Tomé
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Quality assurance in radiotherapy: evaluation of errors and incidents recorded over a 10 year period.

Authors:  Tai Keung Yeung; Karen Bortolotto; Scott Cosby; Margaret Hoar; Ernst Lederer
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2004-12-23       Impact factor: 6.280

6.  Developing new extension of GafChromic RTQA2 film to patient quality assurance field using a plan-based calibration method.

Authors:  Jiayuan Peng; Zhen Zhang; Jiazhou Wang; Jiang Xie; Junchao Chen; Weigang Hu
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  On the new metrics for IMRT QA verification.

Authors:  Alejandro Garcia-Romero; Araceli Hernandez-Vitoria; Esther Millan-Cebrian; Veronica Alba-Escorihuela; Sonia Serrano-Zabaleta; Pablo Ortega-Pardina
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Verification of dynamic and segmental IMRT delivery by dynamic log file analysis.

Authors:  Dale W Litzenberg; Jean M Moran; Benedick A Fraass
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  The sensitivity of ArcCHECK-based gamma analysis to manufactured errors in helical tomotherapy radiation delivery.

Authors:  Alistair K Templeton; James C H Chu; Julius V Turian
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Comparison of two commercial detector arrays for IMRT quality assurance.

Authors:  Jonathan G Li; Guanghua Yan; Chihray Liu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-04-29       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  4 in total

1.  Auto-Trending daily quality assurance program for a pencil beam scanning proton system aligned with TG 224.

Authors:  Chengyu Shi; Qing Chen; Francis Yu; Jingqiao Zhang; Minglei Kang; Shikui Tang; Chang Chang; Haibo Lin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-12-18       Impact factor: 2.102

2.  Alignment-invariant signal reality reconstruction in hyperspectral imaging using a deep convolutional neural network architecture.

Authors:  S Shayan Mousavi M; Alexandre Pofelski; Hassan Teimoori; Gianluigi A Botton
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 4.996

3.  Analysis of EPID Transmission Fluence Maps Using Machine Learning Models and CNN for Identifying Position Errors in the Treatment of GO Patients.

Authors:  Guyu Dai; Xiangbin Zhang; Wenjie Liu; Zhibin Li; Guangyu Wang; Yaxin Liu; Qing Xiao; Lian Duan; Jing Li; Xinyu Song; Guangjun Li; Sen Bai
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 6.244

4.  What is the optimal input information for deep learning-based pre-treatment error identification in radiotherapy?

Authors:  Cecile J A Wolfs; Frank Verhaegen
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-08-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.