Cargando…

Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND: In radiotherapy inaccuracy in organ at risk (OAR) delineation can impact treatment plan optimisation and treatment plan evaluation. Brouwer et al. showed significant interobserver variability (IOV) in OAR delineation in head and neck cancer (HNC) and published international consensus gui...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Veen, J., Gulyban, A., Willems, S., Maes, F., Nuyts, S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34183040
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01677-2
_version_ 1783715168084033536
author van der Veen, J.
Gulyban, A.
Willems, S.
Maes, F.
Nuyts, S.
author_facet van der Veen, J.
Gulyban, A.
Willems, S.
Maes, F.
Nuyts, S.
author_sort van der Veen, J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In radiotherapy inaccuracy in organ at risk (OAR) delineation can impact treatment plan optimisation and treatment plan evaluation. Brouwer et al. showed significant interobserver variability (IOV) in OAR delineation in head and neck cancer (HNC) and published international consensus guidelines (ICG) for OAR delineation in 2015. The aim of our study was to evaluate IOV in the presence of these guidelines. METHODS: HNC radiation oncologists (RO) from each Belgian radiotherapy centre were invited to complete a survey and submit contours for 5 HNC cases. Reference contours (OARref) were obtained by a clinically validated artificial intelligence-tool trained using ICG. Dice similarity coefficients (DSC), mean surface distance (MSD) and 95% Hausdorff distances (HD95) were used for comparison. RESULTS: Fourteen of twenty-two RO (64%) completed the survey and submitted delineations. Thirteen (93%) confirmed the use of delineation guidelines, of which six (43%) used the ICG. The OARs whose delineations agreed best with the OARref were mandible [median DSC 0.9, range (0.8–0.9); median MSD 1.1 mm, range (0.8–8.3), median HD95 3.4 mm, range (1.5–38.7)], brainstem [median DSC 0.9 (0.6–0.9); median MSD 1.5 mm (1.1–4.0), median HD95 4.0 mm (2.3–15.0)], submandibular glands [median DSC 0.8 (0.5–0.9); median MSD 1.2 mm (0.9–2.5), median HD95 3.1 mm (1.8–12.2)] and parotids [median DSC 0.9 (0.6–0.9); median MSD 1.9 mm (1.2–4.2), median HD95 5.1 mm (3.1–19.2)]. Oral cavity, cochleas, PCMs, supraglottic larynx and glottic area showed more variation. RO who used the consensus guidelines showed significantly less IOV (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although ICG for delineation of OARs in HNC exist, they are only implemented by about half of RO participating in this study, which partly explains the delineation variability. However, this study highlights that guidelines alone do not suffice to eliminate IOV and that more effort needs to be done to accomplish further treatment standardisation, for example with artificial intelligence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s13014-020-01677-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8240214
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82402142021-06-29 Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer van der Veen, J. Gulyban, A. Willems, S. Maes, F. Nuyts, S. Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: In radiotherapy inaccuracy in organ at risk (OAR) delineation can impact treatment plan optimisation and treatment plan evaluation. Brouwer et al. showed significant interobserver variability (IOV) in OAR delineation in head and neck cancer (HNC) and published international consensus guidelines (ICG) for OAR delineation in 2015. The aim of our study was to evaluate IOV in the presence of these guidelines. METHODS: HNC radiation oncologists (RO) from each Belgian radiotherapy centre were invited to complete a survey and submit contours for 5 HNC cases. Reference contours (OARref) were obtained by a clinically validated artificial intelligence-tool trained using ICG. Dice similarity coefficients (DSC), mean surface distance (MSD) and 95% Hausdorff distances (HD95) were used for comparison. RESULTS: Fourteen of twenty-two RO (64%) completed the survey and submitted delineations. Thirteen (93%) confirmed the use of delineation guidelines, of which six (43%) used the ICG. The OARs whose delineations agreed best with the OARref were mandible [median DSC 0.9, range (0.8–0.9); median MSD 1.1 mm, range (0.8–8.3), median HD95 3.4 mm, range (1.5–38.7)], brainstem [median DSC 0.9 (0.6–0.9); median MSD 1.5 mm (1.1–4.0), median HD95 4.0 mm (2.3–15.0)], submandibular glands [median DSC 0.8 (0.5–0.9); median MSD 1.2 mm (0.9–2.5), median HD95 3.1 mm (1.8–12.2)] and parotids [median DSC 0.9 (0.6–0.9); median MSD 1.9 mm (1.2–4.2), median HD95 5.1 mm (3.1–19.2)]. Oral cavity, cochleas, PCMs, supraglottic larynx and glottic area showed more variation. RO who used the consensus guidelines showed significantly less IOV (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although ICG for delineation of OARs in HNC exist, they are only implemented by about half of RO participating in this study, which partly explains the delineation variability. However, this study highlights that guidelines alone do not suffice to eliminate IOV and that more effort needs to be done to accomplish further treatment standardisation, for example with artificial intelligence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s13014-020-01677-2. BioMed Central 2021-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8240214/ /pubmed/34183040 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01677-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
van der Veen, J.
Gulyban, A.
Willems, S.
Maes, F.
Nuyts, S.
Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
title Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
title_full Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
title_fullStr Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
title_full_unstemmed Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
title_short Interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
title_sort interobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34183040
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01677-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vanderveenj interobservervariabilityinorganatriskdelineationinheadandneckcancer
AT gulybana interobservervariabilityinorganatriskdelineationinheadandneckcancer
AT willemss interobservervariabilityinorganatriskdelineationinheadandneckcancer
AT maesf interobservervariabilityinorganatriskdelineationinheadandneckcancer
AT nuytss interobservervariabilityinorganatriskdelineationinheadandneckcancer