MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309039459 · doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2022.11.004

Patient-specific daily updated deep learning auto-segmentation for MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy

2022· article· en· W4309039459 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenjiang Li, Wei Zhang, Baosheng Li, Jianguo Zhu, Yinglin Peng, Chengze Li, Jennifer Zhu, Qichao Zhou, Yong Yin

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiotherapy and Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersShandong First Medical UniversityKey Technology Research and Development Program of ShandongNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsContouringSegmentationCentroidArtificial intelligenceHausdorff distanceComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)MedicineSørensen–Dice coefficientImage segmentationNuclear medicinePattern recognition (psychology)Radiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Deep Learning (DL) technique has shown great potential but still has limited success in online contouring for MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART). This study proposed a patient-specific DL auto-segmentation (DLAS) strategy using the patient's previous images and contours to update the model and improve segmentation accuracy and efficiency for MRgART. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prototype model was trained for each patient using the first set of MRI and corresponding contours as inputs. The patient-specific model was updated after each fraction with all the available fractional MRIs/contours, and then used to predict the segmentation for the next fraction. During model training, a variant was fitted under consistency constraints, limiting the differences in the volume, length and centroid between the predictions for the latest MRI within a reasonable range. The model performance was evaluated for both organ-at-risks and tumors auto-segmentation for a total of 6 abdominal/pelvic cases (each with at least 8 sets of MRIs/contours) underwent MRgART through Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and 95% Hausdorff Distance (HD95), and was compared with deformable image registration (DIR) and frozen DL model (no updating after pre-training). The contouring time was also recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: The proposed model achieved superior performance with higher mean DSC (0.90, 95 % CI: 0.88-0.95), as compared to DIR (0.63, 95 %CI: 0.59-0.68) and frozen DL models (0.74, 95 % CI: 0.71-0.79). As for tumors, the proposed method yielded a median DSC of 0.95, 95 % CI: 0.94-0.97, and a median HD95 of 1.63 mm, 95 % CI: 1.22 mm-2.06 mm. The contouring time was reduced significantly (p < 0.05) using the proposed method (73.4 ± 6.5 secs) compared to the manual process (12 ∼ 22 mins). The online ART time was reduced to 1650 ± 274 seconds with the proposed method, as compared to 3251.8 ± 447 seconds using the original workflow. CONCLUSION: The proposed patient-specific DLAS method can significantly improve the segmentation accuracy and efficiency for longitudinal MRIs, thereby facilitating the routine practice of MRgART.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiotherapy and OncologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207