Back to Search Start Over

Assessing the Feasibility of Using Artificial Intelligence-Segmented Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion for Focal Intraprostatic Boost With External Beam Radiation Therapy.

Authors :
Tsui JMG
Kehayias CE
Leeman JE
Nguyen PL
Peng L
Yang DD
Moningi S
Martin N
Orio PF
D'Amico AV
Bredfeldt JS
Lee LK
Guthier CV
King MT
Source :
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics [Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys] 2024 Jan 01; Vol. 118 (1), pp. 74-84. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Jul 29.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Purpose: The delineation of dominant intraprostatic gross tumor volumes (GTVs) on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can be subject to interobserver variability. We evaluated whether deep learning artificial intelligence (AI)-segmented GTVs can provide a similar degree of intraprostatic boosting with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) as radiation oncologist (RO)-delineated GTVs.<br />Methods and Materials: We identified 124 patients who underwent mpMRI followed by EBRT between 2010 and 2013. A reference GTV was delineated by an RO and approved by a board-certified radiologist. We trained an AI algorithm for GTV delineation on 89 patients, and tested the algorithm on 35 patients, each with at least 1 PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) 4 or 5 lesion (46 total lesions). We then asked 5 additional ROs to independently delineate GTVs on the test set. We compared lesion detectability and geometric accuracy of the GTVs from AI and 5 ROs against the reference GTV. Then, we generated EBRT plans (77 Gy prostate) that boosted each observer-specific GTV to 95 Gy. We compared reference GTV dose (D98%) across observers using a mixed-effects model.<br />Results: On a lesion level, AI GTV exhibited a sensitivity of 82.6% and positive predictive value of 86.4%. Respective ranges among the 5 RO GTVs were 84.8% to 95.7% and 95.1% to 100.0%. Among 30 GTVs mutually identified by all observers, no significant differences in Dice coefficient were detected between AI and any of the 5 ROs. Across all patients, only 2 of 5 ROs had a reference GTV D98% that significantly differed from that of AI by 2.56 Gy (P = .02) and 3.20 Gy (P = .003). The presence of false-negative (-5.97 Gy; P < .001) but not false-positive (P = .24) lesions was associated with reference GTV D98%.<br />Conclusions: AI-segmented GTVs demonstrate potential for intraprostatic boosting, although the degree of boosting may be adversely affected by false-negative lesions. Prospective review of AI-segmented GTVs remains essential.<br /> (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1879-355X
Volume :
118
Issue :
1
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
37517600
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.07.029