RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Clinical Acceptability of Automatically Generated Lymph Node Levels and Structures of Deglutition and Mastication for Head and Neck Cancer Patient Radiation Treatment Planning
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.08.07.23293787
DO 10.1101/2023.08.07.23293787
A1 Maroongroge, Sean
A1 Mohamed, Abdallah Sherif Radwan
A1 Nguyen, Callistus
A1 De la Vega, Jean Guma
A1 Frank, Steven J.
A1 Garden, Adam S.
A1 Gunn, Brandon
A1 Lee, Anna
A1 Mayo, Lauren L.
A1 Moreno, Amy C.
A1 Morrison, William H.
A1 Phan, Jack
A1 Spiotto, Michael T.
A1 Court, Laurence E.
A1 Fuller, Clifton D.
A1 Rosenthal, David I.
A1 Netherton, Tucker J.
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/08/09/2023.08.07.23293787.abstract
AB Purpose/Objective(s) Here we investigate an approach to develop and clinically validate auto-contouring models for lymph node levels and structures of deglutition and mastication in the head and neck. An objective of this work is to provide high quality resources to the scientific community to promote advancement of treatment planning, clinical trial management, and toxicity studies for the head and neck.Materials/Methods CTs of 145 patients who were irradiated for a head and neck primary malignancy at MD Anderson Cancer Center were retrospectively curated. Data were contoured by radiation oncologists and a resident physician and divided into two separate cohorts. One cohort was used to analyze lymph node levels (IA, IB, II, III, IV, V, RP) and the other used to analyze 17 swallowing and chewing structures. Forty-seven patients were in the lymph node level cohort (training/testing = 32/15). All these patients received definitive radiotherapy without a nodal dissection to minimize anatomic perturbation of the lymph node levels. The remaining 98 patients formed the swallowing/chewing structures cohort (training/testing =78/20). Separate nnUnet models were trained and validated using the separate cohorts. For the lymph node levels, two double blinded studies were used to score preference and clinical acceptability (using a 5-point Likert scale) of AI vs human contours. For the swallowing and chewing structures, clinical acceptability was scored. Quantitative analyses of the test sets were performed for AI vs human contours for all structures using the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and the 95208 percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95th).Results Across all lymph node levels (IA, IB, II, III, IV, V, RP), median DSC ranged from 0.77 to 0.89 for AI vs manual contours in the testing cohort. Across all lymph node levels, the AI contour was superior to or equally preferred to the manual contours at rates ranging from 75% to 91% in the first blinded study. In the second blinded study, physician preference for the manual vs AI contour was statistically different for only the RP contours (p < 0.01). Thus, there was not a significant difference in clinical acceptability for nodal levels I-V for manual versus AI contours. Across all physician-generated contours, 82% were rated as usable with stylistic to no edits, and across all AI-generated contours, 92% were rated as usable with stylistic to no edits. For the swallowing structures median DSC ranged from 0.86 to 0.96 and was greater than 0.90 for 11/17 structures types. Of the 340 contours in the test set, only 4% required minor edits.Conclusions An approach to generate clinically acceptable automated contours for lymph node levels and swallowing and chewing structures in the head and neck was demonstrated. For nodal levels I-V, there was no significant difference in clinical acceptability in manual vs AI contours. Of the two testing cohorts for lymph nodes and swallowing and chewing structures, only 8% and 4% of structures required minor edits, respectively. All testing and training data are being made publicly available on The Cancer Imaging Archive.Competing Interest StatementDr. Fuller received/receives related funding and salary support from: National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Cancer Institute (NCI) and National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) Administrative Supplements to Support Collaborations to Improve AIML-Readiness of NIH-Supported Data (R01CA257814-02S3; R01DE028290-04S2); NIH National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) Research Education Programs for Residents and Clinical Fellows Grant (R25EB025787); NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG) (P30CA016672); Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCS-1609-36195; sub-award from Princess Margaret Hospital). Dr. Fuller receives grant and infrastructure support from MD Anderson Cancer Center via the Charles and Daneen Stiefel Center for Head and Neck Cancer Oropharyngeal Cancer Research Program. Dr. Fuller has received NIH sub-award support from Oncospace, Inc. (R43CA254559, PI Lakshminarayanan) under a Small Business Innovation Research Grant Applications grant. Dr. Fuller has received direct industry grant/in-kind support, honoraria, and travel funding from Elekta AB. Dr. Fuller has served as a consulting capacity for Varian/Siemens Healthineers, Philips Medical Systems, and Oncospace, Inc Dr. Court: Other funding: NCI, CPRIT, Wellcome Trust,The Fund for Innovation in Cancer Informatics, Varian Medical Systems Drs. Court, Netherton, and Nguyen are members of the Radiation Treatment Planning Assistant at MD Anderson Cancer CenterFunding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:An approved IRB protocol at MD Anderson Cancer Center was obtained for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data are being made publicly available through repositories.