Sensitivity of automated and manual treatment planning approaches to contouring variation in early-breast cancer treatment.

Details

Ressource 1Download: Zeverino_2024.pdf (980.15 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Final published version
License: CC BY 4.0
Serval ID
serval:BIB_928A3D4544F6
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Sensitivity of automated and manual treatment planning approaches to contouring variation in early-breast cancer treatment.
Journal
Physica medica
Author(s)
Zeverino M., Piccolo C., Marguet M., Jeanneret-Sozzi W., Bourhis J., Bochud F., Moeckli R.
ISSN
1724-191X (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1120-1797
Publication state
Published
Issued date
07/2024
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
123
Pages
103402
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
One of the advantages of integrating automated processes in treatment planning is the reduction of manual planning variability. This study aims to assess whether a deep-learning-based auto-planning solution can also reduce the contouring variation-related impact on the planned dose for early-breast cancer treatment.
Auto- and manual plans were optimized for 20 patients using both auto- and manual OARs, including both lungs, right breast, heart, and left-anterior-descending (LAD) artery. Differences in terms of recalculated dose (ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>M</sup> ,ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>A</sup> ) and reoptimized dose (ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>M</sup> ,ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>A</sup> ) for manual (M) and auto (A)-plans, were evaluated on manual structures. The correlation between several geometric similarities and dose differences was also explored (Spearman's test).
Auto-contours were found slightly smaller in size than manual contours for right breast and heart and more than twice larger for LAD. Recalculated dose differences were found negligible for both planning approaches except for heart (ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>M</sup> =-0.4 Gy, ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>A</sup> =-0.3 Gy) and right breast (ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>M</sup> =-1.2 Gy, ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>A</sup> =-1.3 Gy) maximum dose. Re-optimized dose differences were considered equivalent to recalculated ones for both lungs and LAD, while they were significantly smaller for heart (ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>M</sup> =-0.2 Gy, ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>A</sup> =-0.2 Gy) and right breast (ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>M</sup> =-0.3 Gy, ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>A</sup> =-0.9 Gy) maximum dose. Twenty-one correlations were found for ΔD <sub>rc</sub> <sup>M,A</sup> (M=8,A=13) that reduced to four for ΔD <sub>ro</sub> <sup>M,A</sup> (M=3,A=1).
The sensitivity of auto-planning to contouring variation was found not relevant when compared to manual planning, regardless of the method used to calculate the dose differences. Nonetheless, the method employed to define the dose differences strongly affected the correlation analysis resulting highly reduced when dose was reoptimized, regardless of the planning approach.
Keywords
Humans, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods, Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy, Automation, Radiotherapy Dosage, Female, Organs at Risk/radiation effects, Deep Learning, Automated treatment planning, Contouring variation, Early-breast cancer treatment, Planned dose difference
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
21/06/2024 9:07
Last modification date
16/07/2024 6:09
Usage data