0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Proof‐of‐concept study of artificial intelligence‐assisted review of CBCT image guidance

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Automation and computer assistance can support quality assurance tasks in radiotherapy. Retrospective image review requires significant human resources, and automation of image review remains a noteworthy missing element in previous work. Here, we present initial findings from a proof‐of‐concept clinical implementation of an AI‐assisted review of CBCT registrations used for patient setup.

          Methods

          An automated pipeline was developed and executed nightly, utilizing python scripts to interact with the clinical database through DICOM networking protocol and automate data retrieval and analysis. A previously developed artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm scored CBCT setup registrations based on misalignment likelihood, using a scale from 0 (most unlikely) through 1 (most likely). Over a 45‐day period, 1357 pre‐treatment CBCT registrations from 197 patients were retrieved and analyzed by the pipeline. Daily summary reports of the previous day's registrations were produced. Initial action levels targeted 10% of cases to highlight for in‐depth physics review. A validation subset of 100 cases was scored by three independent observers to characterize AI‐model performance.

          Results

          Following an ROC analysis, a global threshold for model predictions of 0.87 was determined, with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 82%. Inspecting the observer scores for the stratified validation dataset showed a statistically significant correlation between observer scores and model predictions.

          Conclusion

          In this work, we describe the implementation of an automated AI‐analysis pipeline for daily quantitative analysis of CBCT‐guided patient setup registrations. The AI‐model was validated against independent expert observers, and appropriate action levels were determined to minimize false positives without sacrificing sensitivity. Case studies demonstrate the potential benefits of such a pipeline to bolster quality and safety programs in radiotherapy. To the authors’ knowledge, there are no previous works performing AI‐assisted assessment of pre‐treatment CBCT‐based patient alignment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An introduction to ROC analysis

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Strategies for effective physics plan and chart review in radiation therapy: Report of AAPM Task Group 275

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Deformable image registration for radiation therapy: principle, methods, applications and evaluation

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jneylon@mednet.ucla.edu
                Journal
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                10.1002/(ISSN)1526-9914
                ACM2
                Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1526-9914
                10 May 2023
                September 2023
                : 24
                : 9 ( doiID: 10.1002/acm2.v24.9 )
                : e14016
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Radiation Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine University of California Los Angeles California USA
                [ 2 ] Department of Medical Physics Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond Virginia USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Jack Neylon, Department of Radiation Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

                Email: jneylon@ 123456mednet.ucla.edu

                Article
                ACM214016
                10.1002/acm2.14016
                10476980
                37165761
                73ce1837-33e7-4f0a-a849-6b8bbb8866b2
                © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 March 2023
                : 09 January 2023
                : 19 April 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 7, Tables: 1, Pages: 9, Words: 5282
                Funding
                Funded by: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality , doi 10.13039/100000133;
                Award ID: 1R01HS026486
                Categories
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                September 2023
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.3.3 mode:remove_FC converted:04.09.2023

                artificial intelligence,cbct,igrt,quality control
                artificial intelligence, cbct, igrt, quality control

                Comments

                Comment on this article