The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Accuracy of manual and automated rectal contours using helical tomotherapy image guidance scans during prostate radiotherapy.

Accuracy of manual and automated rectal contours using helical tomotherapy image guidance scans during prostate radiotherapy.
Accuracy of manual and automated rectal contours using helical tomotherapy image guidance scans during prostate radiotherapy.
Background: Prostate radiotherapy can be delivered using daily image-guided helical tomotherapy. Previous work has shown that contouring the rectum on the kV planning CT scan has a Jaccard conformity index (JCI) of 0.78 for different oncologists (inter-observer variability) and 0.82 for a single oncologist (intra-observer variability) (Lutgendorf-Caucig C et al. Feasibility of CBCT-based target and normal structure delineation in prostate cancer radiotherapy: multi-observer and image multi-modality study. Radiother Oncol. 2011;98(2):154-61.). Using the daily image guidance MV CT scan we have developed automated methods to contour the rectum in order to investigate the dose delivered over a course of treatment. We sought to quantify the accuracy of MV manual and automated contours. Methods: A single oncologist (JES) contoured the rectum on 370 MV scans for 10 participants treated with helical tomotherapy to prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. Accuracy of MV manual contours was tested using a scalar algorithm to enlarge and reduce the contours and intra-observer re-contouring at a 3-month interval. Automated contouring, incorporating the Chan-Vese algorithm, was developed and outputs were compared with manual contours. Results: JES could identify differences in MV manual contour size at the level of ±2.2 mm, equivalent to 1.7 pixels. The median JCI for MV re-contouring was 0.87 with inter-quartile range (IQR) 0.78 to 0.90. When compared with manual contours, automated outputs had a median JCI of 0.79 (IQR 0.74 to 0.79). These results were obtained after 3 iterations, each taking less than 10 seconds. Conclusions: Manual contouring using MV scans was accurate, at a level of approximately 2 mm, and reproducible, with JCI of 0.87. The time taken to contour was approximately 20 minutes per scan. Automated contouring was also reproducible with JCI of 0.79 and, in contrast, took less than a minute per scan. Both manual and automated methods produced results comparable to those for contouring using kV scans. We plan to use auto-contouring to calculate accumulated dose to the rectum in an initial cohort of 100 participants. These doses will be correlated with toxicity as part of the VoxTox Study.
1527-7755
94-94
Scaife, Jessica Elizabeth
8d923877-12da-4a78-899c-c04cc72c804b
Harrison, Karl
6a02690d-d0d5-4d5f-a3e9-a6a0edd5c623
Drew, Amelia
a447d2ca-bafc-4268-9bc1-e6e21c992a9a
Cai, Xiaohao
de483445-45e9-4b21-a4e8-b0427fc72cee
Lee, Juheon
cd382ebf-0bcc-47b8-a60d-68c6540d31bb
Schonlieb, Carola-Bibiane
a42e0ee1-9df4-41b3-ae0e-adab80249811
Sutcliffe, Michael
5117fd2a-e0b0-46ff-bbac-3758fabfa955
Parker, M. Andy
c65b0366-a89e-41db-a9e1-09bb3cde0f4d
Freeman, Sue
ddee3744-adf9-426a-94b2-603a195ffd70
Romanchikova, Marina
c39549ff-c8f8-4130-9303-220c0a63059a
Thomas, Simon
6269a307-6836-4103-8b19-d3eab3ac7c47
Jena, Raj
03009c98-6680-4bf4-b8ac-71a78345ff32
Bates, Amy
565a0d61-34c7-4912-bd0e-1bc561ca4a50
Burnet, Neil
628e3a34-5db9-436f-836c-04169c3f8cde
Scaife, Jessica Elizabeth
8d923877-12da-4a78-899c-c04cc72c804b
Harrison, Karl
6a02690d-d0d5-4d5f-a3e9-a6a0edd5c623
Drew, Amelia
a447d2ca-bafc-4268-9bc1-e6e21c992a9a
Cai, Xiaohao
de483445-45e9-4b21-a4e8-b0427fc72cee
Lee, Juheon
cd382ebf-0bcc-47b8-a60d-68c6540d31bb
Schonlieb, Carola-Bibiane
a42e0ee1-9df4-41b3-ae0e-adab80249811
Sutcliffe, Michael
5117fd2a-e0b0-46ff-bbac-3758fabfa955
Parker, M. Andy
c65b0366-a89e-41db-a9e1-09bb3cde0f4d
Freeman, Sue
ddee3744-adf9-426a-94b2-603a195ffd70
Romanchikova, Marina
c39549ff-c8f8-4130-9303-220c0a63059a
Thomas, Simon
6269a307-6836-4103-8b19-d3eab3ac7c47
Jena, Raj
03009c98-6680-4bf4-b8ac-71a78345ff32
Bates, Amy
565a0d61-34c7-4912-bd0e-1bc561ca4a50
Burnet, Neil
628e3a34-5db9-436f-836c-04169c3f8cde

Scaife, Jessica Elizabeth, Harrison, Karl, Drew, Amelia, Cai, Xiaohao, Lee, Juheon, Schonlieb, Carola-Bibiane, Sutcliffe, Michael, Parker, M. Andy, Freeman, Sue, Romanchikova, Marina, Thomas, Simon, Jena, Raj, Bates, Amy and Burnet, Neil (2015) Accuracy of manual and automated rectal contours using helical tomotherapy image guidance scans during prostate radiotherapy. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 33 (7_suppl), 94-94. (doi:10.1200/jco.2015.33.7_suppl.94).

Record type: Meeting abstract

Abstract

Background: Prostate radiotherapy can be delivered using daily image-guided helical tomotherapy. Previous work has shown that contouring the rectum on the kV planning CT scan has a Jaccard conformity index (JCI) of 0.78 for different oncologists (inter-observer variability) and 0.82 for a single oncologist (intra-observer variability) (Lutgendorf-Caucig C et al. Feasibility of CBCT-based target and normal structure delineation in prostate cancer radiotherapy: multi-observer and image multi-modality study. Radiother Oncol. 2011;98(2):154-61.). Using the daily image guidance MV CT scan we have developed automated methods to contour the rectum in order to investigate the dose delivered over a course of treatment. We sought to quantify the accuracy of MV manual and automated contours. Methods: A single oncologist (JES) contoured the rectum on 370 MV scans for 10 participants treated with helical tomotherapy to prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. Accuracy of MV manual contours was tested using a scalar algorithm to enlarge and reduce the contours and intra-observer re-contouring at a 3-month interval. Automated contouring, incorporating the Chan-Vese algorithm, was developed and outputs were compared with manual contours. Results: JES could identify differences in MV manual contour size at the level of ±2.2 mm, equivalent to 1.7 pixels. The median JCI for MV re-contouring was 0.87 with inter-quartile range (IQR) 0.78 to 0.90. When compared with manual contours, automated outputs had a median JCI of 0.79 (IQR 0.74 to 0.79). These results were obtained after 3 iterations, each taking less than 10 seconds. Conclusions: Manual contouring using MV scans was accurate, at a level of approximately 2 mm, and reproducible, with JCI of 0.87. The time taken to contour was approximately 20 minutes per scan. Automated contouring was also reproducible with JCI of 0.79 and, in contrast, took less than a minute per scan. Both manual and automated methods produced results comparable to those for contouring using kV scans. We plan to use auto-contouring to calculate accumulated dose to the rectum in an initial cohort of 100 participants. These doses will be correlated with toxicity as part of the VoxTox Study.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: 1 March 2015

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 438755
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/438755
ISSN: 1527-7755
PURE UUID: 838fc539-4077-440c-9c82-8cf021fbffce

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 24 Mar 2020 17:30
Last modified: 17 Jul 2020 16:35

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Jessica Elizabeth Scaife
Author: Karl Harrison
Author: Amelia Drew
Author: Xiaohao Cai
Author: Juheon Lee
Author: Carola-Bibiane Schonlieb
Author: Michael Sutcliffe
Author: M. Andy Parker
Author: Sue Freeman
Author: Marina Romanchikova
Author: Simon Thomas
Author: Raj Jena
Author: Amy Bates
Author: Neil Burnet

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×