Work

Autodelineation methods in a simulated fully automated proton therapy workflow for esophageal cancer

Year: 2024

Type: article

Abstract: Background and purpose Proton Online Adaptive RadioTherapy (ProtOnART) harnesses the dosimetric advantage of protons and immediately acts upon anatomical changes. Here, we simulate the clinical application of delineation and planning within a ProtOnART-workflow for esophageal cancer. We aim to identify the most appropriate technique for autodelineation and evaluate full automation by replanning on autodelineated contours. Materials and methods We evaluated 15 patients who started treatment between 11-2022 and 01-2024, undergoing baseline and three repeat computed tomography (CT) scans in treatment position. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations compared different autodelineation methods. For Organs-at-risk (OAR) deep learning segmentation (DLS), rigid and deformable propagation from baseline to repeat CT-scans were considered. For the clinical target volume (CTV), rigid and three deformable propagation methods (default, heart as controlling structure and with focus region) were evaluated. Adaptive treatment plans with 7 mm (ATP 7mm ) and 3 mm (ATP 3mm ) setup robustness were generated using best-performing autodelineated contours. Clinical acceptance of ATPs was evaluated using goals encompassing ground-truth CTV-coverage and OAR-dose. Results Deformation was preferred for autodelineation of heart, lungs and spinal cord. DLS was preferred for all other OARs. For CTV, deformation with focus region was the preferred method although the difference with other deformation methods was small. Nominal ATPs passed evaluation goals for 87 % of ATP 7mm and 67 % of ATP 3mm . This dropped to respectively 2 % and 29 % after robust evaluation. Insufficient CTV-coverage was the main reason for ATP-rejection. Conclusion Autodelineation aids a ProtOnART-workflow for esophageal cancer. Currently available tools regularly require manual annotations to generate clinically acceptable ATPs.

Source: Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology

DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100646