Analyzing the Relationship between Dose and Geometric Agreement Metrics for Auto-Contouring in Head and Neck Normal Tissues

Author:

Marquez Barbara12ORCID,Wooten Zachary T.3,Salazar Ramon M.12ORCID,Peterson Christine B.24,Fuentes David T.25,Whitaker T. J.1,Jhingran Anuja6,Pollard-Larkin Julianne12,Prajapati Surendra12,Beadle Beth7,Cardenas Carlos E.8ORCID,Netherton Tucker J.1,Court Laurence E.12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA

2. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX 77030, USA

3. Department of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005, USA

4. Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA

5. Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA

6. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA

7. Department of Radiation Oncology–Radiation Therapy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA

8. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Alabama, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the relationship between geometric and dosimetric agreement metrics in head and neck (H&N) cancer radiotherapy plans. A total 287 plans were retrospectively analyzed, comparing auto-contoured and clinically used contours using a Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), surface DSC (sDSC), and Hausdorff distance (HD). Organs-at-risk (OARs) with ≥200 cGy dose differences from the clinical contour in terms of Dmax (D0.01cc) and Dmean were further examined against proximity to the planning target volume (PTV). A secondary set of 91 plans from multiple institutions validated these findings. For 4995 contour pairs across 19 OARs, 90% had a DSC, sDSC, and HD of at least 0.75, 0.86, and less than 7.65 mm, respectively. Dosimetrically, the absolute difference between the two contour sets was <200 cGy for 95% of OARs in terms of Dmax and 96% in terms of Dmean. In total, 97% of OARs exhibiting significant dose differences between the clinically edited contour and auto-contour were within 2.5 cm PTV regardless of geometric agreement. There was an approximately linear trend between geometric agreement and identifying at least 200 cGy dose differences, with higher geometric agreement corresponding to a lower fraction of cases being identified. Analysis of the secondary dataset validated these findings. Geometric indices are approximate indicators of contour quality and identify contours exhibiting significant dosimetric discordance. For a small subset of OARs within 2.5 cm of the PTV, geometric agreement metrics can be misleading in terms of contour quality.

Funder

Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas

Cancer Prevention and Research Institute

UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences American Legion Auxiliary Fellowships in Cancer Research

Publisher

MDPI AG

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3