Advances in Radiation Oncology (Apr 2024)

Prospective Evaluation of Automated Contouring for CT-Based Brachytherapy for Gynecologic Malignancies

  • Abigayle C. Kraus, MD,
  • Zohaib Iqbal, PhD,
  • Rex A. Cardan, PhD,
  • Richard A. Popple, PhD,
  • Dennis N. Stanley, PhD,
  • Sui Shen, PhD,
  • Joel A. Pogue, PhD,
  • Xingen Wu, PhD,
  • Kevin Lee, MD, PhD,
  • Samuel Marcrom, MD,
  • Carlos E. Cardenas, PhD

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 4
p. 101417

Abstract

Read online

Purpose: The use of deep learning to auto-contour organs at risk (OARs) in gynecologic radiation treatment is well established. Yet, there is limited data investigating the prospective use of auto-contouring in clinical practice. In this study, we assess the accuracy and efficiency of auto-contouring OARs for computed tomography–based brachytherapy treatment planning of gynecologic malignancies. Methods and Materials: An inhouse contouring tool automatically delineated 5 OARs in gynecologic radiation treatment planning: the bladder, small bowel, sigmoid, rectum, and urethra. Accuracy of each auto-contour was evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale: a score of 5 indicated the contour could be used without edits, while a score of 1 indicated the contour was unusable. During scoring, automated contours were edited and subsequently used for treatment planning. Dice similarity coefficient, mean surface distance, 95% Hausdorff distance, Hausdorff distance, and dosimetric changes between original and edited contours were calculated. Contour approval time and total planning time of a prospective auto-contoured (AC) cohort were compared with times from a retrospective manually contoured (MC) cohort. Results: Thirty AC cases from January 2022 to July 2022 and 31 MC cases from July 2021 to January 2022 were included. The mean (±SD) Likert score for each OAR was the following: bladder 4.77 (±0.58), small bowel 3.96 (±0.91), sigmoid colon 3.92 (±0.81), rectum 4.6 (±0.71), and urethra 4.27 (±0.78). No ACs required major edits. All OARs had a mean Dice similarity coefficient > 0.86, mean surface distance .05). The average time to plan approval in the AC cohort was 19% less than the MC cohort. (AC vs MC, 117.0 + 18.0 minutes vs 144.9 ± 64.5 minutes, P = .045). Conclusions: Automated contouring is useful and accurate in clinical practice. Auto-contouring OARs streamlines radiation treatment workflows and decreases time required to design and approve gynecologic brachytherapy plans.