Wen Chen1,2, Yimin Li2,3, Nimu Yuan4, Jinyi Qi4, Brandon A Dyer5, Levent Sensoy2, Stanley H Benedict2, Lu Shang2, Shyam Rao2, Yi Rong2,6. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, United States. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Davis, CA, United States. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, United States.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess image quality and uncertainty in organ-at-risk segmentation on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) enhanced by deep-learning convolutional neural network (DCNN) for head and neck cancer. Methods: An in-house DCNN was trained using forty post-operative head and neck cancer patients with their planning CT and first-fraction CBCT images. Additional fifteen patients with repeat simulation CT (rCT) and CBCT scan taken on the same day (oCBCT) were used for validation and clinical utility assessment. Enhanced CBCT (eCBCT) images were generated from the oCBCT using the in-house DCNN. Quantitative imaging quality improvement was evaluated using HU accuracy, signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), and structural similarity index measure (SSIM). Organs-at-risk (OARs) were delineated on o/eCBCT and compared with manual structures on the same day rCT. Contour accuracy was assessed using dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD), and center of mass (COM) displacement. Qualitative assessment of users' confidence in manual segmenting OARs was performed on both eCBCT and oCBCT by visual scoring. Results: eCBCT organs-at-risk had significant improvement on mean pixel values, SNR (p < 0.05), and SSIM (p < 0.05) compared to oCBCT images. Mean DSC of eCBCT-to-rCT (0.83 ± 0.06) was higher than oCBCT-to-rCT (0.70 ± 0.13). Improvement was observed for mean HD of eCBCT-to-rCT (0.42 ± 0.13 cm) vs. oCBCT-to-rCT (0.72 ± 0.25 cm). Mean COM was less for eCBCT-to-rCT (0.28 ± 0.19 cm) comparing to oCBCT-to-rCT (0.44 ± 0.22 cm). Visual scores showed OAR segmentation was more accessible on eCBCT than oCBCT images. Conclusion: DCNN improved fast-scan low-dose CBCT in terms of the HU accuracy, image contrast, and OAR delineation accuracy, presenting potential of eCBCT for adaptive radiotherapy.
Purpose: To assess image quality and uncertainty in organ-at-risk segmentation on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) enhanced by deep-learning convolutional neural network (DCNN) for head and neck cancer. Methods: An in-house DCNN was trained using forty post-operative head and neck cancerpatients with their planning CT and first-fraction CBCT images. Additional fifteen patients with repeat simulation CT (rCT) and CBCT scan taken on the same day (oCBCT) were used for validation and clinical utility assessment. Enhanced CBCT (eCBCT) images were generated from the oCBCT using the in-house DCNN. Quantitative imaging quality improvement was evaluated using HU accuracy, signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), and structural similarity index measure (SSIM). Organs-at-risk (OARs) were delineated on o/eCBCT and compared with manual structures on the same day rCT. Contour accuracy was assessed using dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD), and center of mass (COM) displacement. Qualitative assessment of users' confidence in manual segmenting OARs was performed on both eCBCT and oCBCT by visual scoring. Results: eCBCT organs-at-risk had significant improvement on mean pixel values, SNR (p < 0.05), and SSIM (p < 0.05) compared to oCBCT images. Mean DSC of eCBCT-to-rCT (0.83 ± 0.06) was higher than oCBCT-to-rCT (0.70 ± 0.13). Improvement was observed for mean HD of eCBCT-to-rCT (0.42 ± 0.13 cm) vs. oCBCT-to-rCT (0.72 ± 0.25 cm). Mean COM was less for eCBCT-to-rCT (0.28 ± 0.19 cm) comparing to oCBCT-to-rCT (0.44 ± 0.22 cm). Visual scores showed OAR segmentation was more accessible on eCBCT than oCBCT images. Conclusion:DCNN improved fast-scan low-dose CBCT in terms of the HU accuracy, image contrast, and OAR delineation accuracy, presenting potential of eCBCT for adaptive radiotherapy.
Authors: Catarina Veiga; Ana Mónica Lourenço; Syed Mouinuddin; Marcel van Herk; Marc Modat; Sébastien Ourselin; Gary Royle; Jamie R McClelland Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Jason Pukala; Sanford L Meeks; Robert J Staton; Frank J Bova; Rafael R Mañon; Katja M Langen Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Nimu Yuan; Brandon Dyer; Shyam Rao; Quan Chen; Stanley Benedict; Lu Shang; Yan Kang; Jinyi Qi; Yi Rong Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2020-01-27 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Charlotte L Brouwer; Roel J H M Steenbakkers; Edwin van den Heuvel; Joop C Duppen; Arash Navran; Henk P Bijl; Olga Chouvalova; Fred R Burlage; Harm Meertens; Johannes A Langendijk; Aart A van 't Veld Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2012-03-13 Impact factor: 3.481