| Literature DB >> 34387104 |
Ruifen Cao1,2, Xi Pei3, Ning Ge4, Chunhou Zheng1,2.
Abstract
Radiotherapy plays an important role in controlling the local recurrence of esophageal cancer after radical surgery. Segmentation of the clinical target volume is a key step in radiotherapy treatment planning, but it is time-consuming and operator-dependent. This paper introduces a deep dilated convolutional U-network to achieve fast and accurate clinical target volume auto-segmentation of esophageal cancer after radical surgery. The deep dilated convolutional U-network, which integrates the advantages of dilated convolution and the U-network, is an end-to-end architecture that enables rapid training and testing. A dilated convolution module for extracting multiscale context features containing the original information on fine texture and boundaries is integrated into the U-network architecture to avoid information loss due to down-sampling and improve the segmentation accuracy. In addition, batch normalization is added to the deep dilated convolutional U-network for fast and stable convergence. In the present study, the training and validation loss tended to be stable after 40 training epochs. This deep dilated convolutional U-network model was able to segment the clinical target volume with an overall mean Dice similarity coefficient of 86.7% and a respective 95% Hausdorff distance of 37.4 mm, indicating reasonable volume overlap of the auto-segmented and manual contours. The mean Cohen kappa coefficient was 0.863, indicating that the deep dilated convolutional U-network was robust. Comparisons with the U-network and attention U-network showed that the overall performance of the deep dilated convolutional U-network was best for the Dice similarity coefficient, 95% Hausdorff distance, and Cohen kappa coefficient. The test time for segmentation of the clinical target volume was approximately 25 seconds per patient. This deep dilated convolutional U-network could be applied in the clinical setting to save time in delineation and improve the consistency of contouring.Entities:
Keywords: clinical target volume; dilated convolution; esophageal cancer; radiotherapy; segmentation
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34387104 PMCID: PMC8366129 DOI: 10.1177/15330338211034284
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat ISSN: 1533-0338
Figure 1.Flowchart of CTV segmentation based on deep learning.
Figure 2.DDUnet architecture. The numbers in the boxes represent the outputs of the operation. The third dimension is the number of features, and the numbers of the first 2 dimensions represent the size of each 2-dimensional feature.
Detailed Model of DDUnet.
| Layer name | Type | Stride | Dilation | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dilation conv | 3 × 3 | 1 | 1 | 256 × 256 × 64 |
| 3 × 3 | 1 | 2 | 256 × 256 × 128 | |
| 3 × 3 | 1 | 4 | 256 × 256 × 256 | |
| Maxpool1 | 3 × 3 | 2 | None | 128 × 128 × 64 |
| 3 × 3 | 4 | None | 64 × 64 × 128 | |
| 3 × 3 | 8 | None | 32 × 32 × 256 | |
| Conv1 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 256 × 256 × 64 |
| BN | 256 × 256 × 64 | |||
| Maxpool2 | 2 × 2 | 2 | None | 128 × 128 × 64 |
| Conv2 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 128 × 128 × 128 |
| BN | 128 × 128 × 128 | |||
| Maxpool3 | 3 × 3 | 2 | None | 64 × 64 × 128 |
| Conv3 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 64 × 64 × 256 |
| BN | 64 × 64 × 256 | |||
| Maxpool4 | 2 × 2 | 2 | None | 32 × 32 × 256 |
| Conv4 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 32 × 32 × 512 |
| BN | 32 × 32 × 512 | |||
| Maxpool5 | 2 × 2 | 2 | None | 16 × 16 × 512 |
| Conv5 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 16 × 16 × 1024 |
| BN | 16 × 16 × 1024 | |||
| UpSampling | 2 × 2 | 2 | None | 32 × 32 × 512 |
| Conv6 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 32 × 32 × 512 |
| BN | 32 × 32 × 512 | |||
| UpSampling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 64 × 64 × 256 | |
| Conv7 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 64 × 64 × 256 |
| BN | 64 × 64 × 256 | |||
| UpSampling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 128 × 128 × 128 | |
| Conv8 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 128 × 128 × 128 |
| BN | 128 × 128 × 128 | |||
| UpSampling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 256 × 256 × 64 | |
| Conv9 (×2) | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 256 × 256 × 64 |
| Conv10 | 3 × 3 | 1 | None | 256 × 256 × 3 |
| Conv11 | 1 × 1 | 1 | None | 256 × 256 × 1 |
Figure 3.Plot of training and validation DSC with epochs of U-Net (left) and U-Net + BN (right).
Figure 4.DSC accuracy plot of training and validation with epochs of the U-Net, U-Net + BN, and DDUnet.
Figure 5.Boxplots obtained from DSC and KAP analyses.
Figure 6.Bar chart of DSC values for different patients using different models.
Figure 7.Bar chart of 95% HD for different patients using different models.
Comparison of Performance of CTV Segmentation for Patients With EC After Surgery.
| DSC (%) | 95% HD (mm) | KAP | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Models | Max | Avg | Min | Max | Avg | Min | Max | Avg | Min |
| U-Net | 89.0 | 83.5 | 76.5 |
| 21.4 | 14.2 | 88.7 | 83.1 | 76 |
| U-Net + BN |
| 84.4 | 74.9 | 43.8 | 23.6 |
| 96.5 | 84 | 74.3 |
| DDUnet |
|
|
| 37.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Attention U-Net |
| 84.5 | 75 | 44.4 | 22.3 |
| 96.5 | 84.2 | 74.4 |
Note: The boldface values indicate the best values among all models.
Figure 8.Segmentation results of (A-F) transverse, (G-I) coronal, and (J-L) sagittal CT slices for different patients.