Clinical Evaluation of Commercial Deep Learning and Model-Based Segmentation Algorithms for Male Pelvic Structures in Prostate Cancer Computed Tomography Scans
Source abstract
Abstract
The performances of two autosegmentation algorithms were evaluated on 28 anonymized pelvic CT scans as a pilot study for the clinical implementation of a semi-automatic workflow. Four organs at risk (OARs), namely the rectum, bladder, and femoral heads, were contoured manually by an expert radiation oncologist (RO)—considered as the ground truth (GT)—and by model-based segmentation (MBS) and deep learning (DL) algorithms. Autocontouring performances were evaluated using a qualitative scoring system, contouring time analysis, and five geometrical indices: the 95th percentile Hausdorff Distance (95HD), Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Surface Dice Similarity Coefficient (SDSC), Added Path Length (APL), and Relative Added Path Length (RAPL). Considering total median value for the four OARs, both MBS and DL showed clinically acceptable results with differences between the two algorithms being not statistically significant for almost all indices. The DL autocontouring algorithm achieved high geometric accuracy, high scores from the ROs, and consistent performances with all validation indices for every OAR. The MBS algorithm achieved high geometric accuracy for the femoral heads and bladder. The DL algorithm required 30 s to contour all the OARs, and the MBS algorithm required 90 s, showing a time gain compared with the manual contours, which took 20 min for each case. The DL autocontouring algorithm obtained promising but preliminary results with every evaluation metric and for every analyzed OAR. The application of the MBS algorithm as the only contouring tool still presents challenges.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment · Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques · Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Medical Physics Unit, AOU di Modena, 41125 Modena, Italy
Post Graduate School in Medical Physics, UNITO, 10125 Torino, Italy
Radiotherapy Unit, Department of Oncology and Hematology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena, 41125 Modena, Italy
Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Mother, Child and Adult, UNIMORE, 41125 Modena, Italy
Department of Physics and Astronomy, UNIBO, 40127 Bologna, Italy
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. Treatment Planning Comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π Radiotherapy for Prostate Cases10.1186/s13014-016-0761-0 ↗
2. Wang, W., Wang, Q., Jia, M., Wang, Z., Yang, C., Zhang, D., Wen, S., Hou, D., Liu, N., and Wang, P. (2021). Deep Learning-Augmented Head and Neck Organs at Risk Segmentation from CT Volumes. Front. Phys., 9.10.3389/fphy.2021.743190 ↗
3. Doolan, P.J., Charalambous, S., Roussakis, Y., Leczynski, A., Peratikou, M., Benjamin, M., Ferentinos, K., Strouthos, I., Zamboglou, C., and Karagiannis, E. (2023). A Clinical Evaluation of the Performance of Five Commercial Artificial Intelligence Contouring Systems for Radiotherapy. Front. Oncol., 13.10.3389/fonc.2023.1213068 ↗
4. Pelvic Normal Tissue Contouring Guidelines for Radiation Therapy: A Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Consensus Panel Atlas10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.01.023 ↗
5. Kalantar, R., Lin, G., Winfield, J.M., Messiou, C., Lalondrelle, S., Blackledge, M.D., and Koh, D.M. (2021). Automatic Segmentation of Pelvic Cancers Using Deep Learning: State-of-the-Art Approaches and Challenges. Diagnostics, 11.10.20944/preprints202108.0258.v1 ↗
6. El-Baz, A.S., Saba, L., and Suri, J. (2014). Multi-Atlas-Based Segmentation of Pelvic Structures from CT Scans for Planning in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy. Abdomen and Thoracic Imaging: An Engineering & Clinical Perspective, Springer.
7. High-Dose Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Early Toxicity and Biochemical Outcome in 772 Patients10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02857-2 ↗
8. Guo, D., Jin, D., Zhu, Z., Ho, T.-Y., Harrison, A.P., Chao, C.-H., Xiao, J., and Ku, L. (2020). Organ at Risk Segmentation for Head and Neck Cancer Using Stratified Learning and Neural Architecture Search. arXiv.10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.00428 ↗
9. Evaluation of Atlas-Based Auto-Segmentation Software in Prostate Cancer Patients10.1002/jmrs.64 ↗
10. Clinical Validation of Atlas-Based Auto-Segmentation of Multiple Target Volumes and Normal Tissue (Swallowing/Mastication) Structures in the Head and Neck10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.07.009 ↗
11. Segmentation of Organs-at-Risks in Head and Neck CT Images Using Convolutional Neural Networks10.1002/mp.12045 ↗
12. Knowledge Distillation and Teacher–Student Learning in Medical Imaging: Comprehensive Overview, Pivotal Role, and Future Directions10.1016/j.media.2025.103819 ↗
13. Vision-Language Models in Medical Image Analysis: From Simple Fusion to General Large Models10.1016/j.inffus.2025.102995 ↗
14. RaySearch Laboratories (2021). RayStation 11B User Manual, RaySearch Laboratories.
15. Review of Deep Learning: Concepts, CNN Architectures, Challenges, Applications, Future Directions10.1186/s40537-021-00444-8 ↗
16. Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., and Brox, T. (2015). U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation. arXiv.10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28 ↗
17. Çiçek, Ö., Abdulkadir, A., Lienkamp, S.S., Brox, T., and Ronneberger, O. (2016). 3D U-Net: Learning Dense Volumetric Segmentation from Sparse Annotation. arXiv.10.1007/978-3-319-46723-8_49 ↗
18. RaySearch Laboratories (2021). Machine Learning Reference Manual, RaySearch Laboratories.
19. Metrics to Evaluate the Performance of Auto-Segmentation for Radiation Treatment Planning: A Critical Review10.1016/j.radonc.2021.05.003 ↗
20. Clinical Implementation of Deep Learning Contour Autosegmentation for Prostate Radiotherapy10.1016/j.radonc.2021.02.040 ↗
21. Recommendations on How to Establish Evidence from Auto-Segmentation Software in Radiotherapy10.1016/j.radonc.2014.09.014 ↗
22. Taha, A.A., and Hanbury, A. (2015). Metrics for Evaluating 3D Medical Image Segmentation: Analysis, Selection, and Tool. BMC Med. Imaging, 15.10.1186/s12880-015-0068-x ↗
23. Comparative Evaluation of Autocontouring in Clinical Practice: A Practical Method Using the Turing Test10.1002/mp.13200 ↗
24. Evaluation of Measures for Assessing Time-Saving of Automatic Organ-at-Risk Segmentation in Radiotherapy10.1016/j.phro.2019.12.001 ↗
25. Interactive Contouring through Contextual Deep Learning10.1002/mp.14852 ↗
26. Hierarchical Clustering Applied to Automatic Atlas Based Segmentation of 25 Cardiac Sub-Structures10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.12.001 ↗
27. Rauseo, E., Omer, M., Amir-Khalili, A., Sojoudi, A., Le, T.-T., Cook, S.A., Hausenloy, D.J., Ang, B., Toh, D.-F., and Bryant, J. (2021). A Systematic Quality Scoring Analysis to Assess Automated Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Segmentation Algorithms. Front. Cardiovasc. Med., 8.10.3389/fcvm.2021.816985 ↗
28. Morphometric Analysis of White Matter Lesions in MR Images: Method and Validation10.1109/42.363096 ↗
29. Applications and Limitations of Machine Learning in Radiation Oncology10.1259/bjr.20190001 ↗