Cargando…

Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the clinical performance of a machine learning (ML) algorithm for organ‐at‐risk (OAR) dose prediction for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and estimate the treatment planning benefit from having upfront access to these dose predictions. METHODS: ML models were t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brodin, N. Patrik, Schulte, Leslie, Velten, Christian, Martin, William, Shen, Sydney, Shen, Jin, Basavatia, Amar, Ohri, Nitin, Garg, Madhur K., Carpenter, Colin, Tomé, Wolfgang A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9195027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35460150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13609
_version_ 1784726876636315648
author Brodin, N. Patrik
Schulte, Leslie
Velten, Christian
Martin, William
Shen, Sydney
Shen, Jin
Basavatia, Amar
Ohri, Nitin
Garg, Madhur K.
Carpenter, Colin
Tomé, Wolfgang A.
author_facet Brodin, N. Patrik
Schulte, Leslie
Velten, Christian
Martin, William
Shen, Sydney
Shen, Jin
Basavatia, Amar
Ohri, Nitin
Garg, Madhur K.
Carpenter, Colin
Tomé, Wolfgang A.
author_sort Brodin, N. Patrik
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To quantify the clinical performance of a machine learning (ML) algorithm for organ‐at‐risk (OAR) dose prediction for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and estimate the treatment planning benefit from having upfront access to these dose predictions. METHODS: ML models were trained using multi‐center data consisting of 209 patients previously treated with lung SBRT. Two prescription levels were investigated, 50 Gy in five fractions and 54 Gy in three fractions. Models were generated using a gradient‐boosted regression tree algorithm using grid searching with fivefold cross‐validation. Twenty patients not included in the training set were used to test OAR dose prediction performance, ten for each prescription. We also performed blinded re‐planning based on OAR dose predictions but without access to clinically delivered plans. Differences between predicted and delivered doses were assessed by root‐mean square deviation (RMSD), and statistical differences between predicted, delivered, and re‐planned doses were evaluated with one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests. RESULTS: ANOVA tests showed no significant differences between predicted, delivered, and replanned OAR doses (all p ≥ 0.36). The RMSD was 2.9, 3.9, 4.3, and 1.7Gy for max dose to the spinal cord, great vessels, heart, and trachea, respectively, for 50 Gy in five fractions. Average improvements of 1.0, 1.4, and 2.0 Gy were seen for spinal cord, esophagus, and trachea max doses in blinded replans compared to clinically delivered plans with 54 Gy in three fractions, and 1.8, 0.7, and 1.5 Gy, respectively, for the esophagus, heart and bronchus max doses with 50 Gy in five fractions. Target coverage was similar with an average PTV V100% of 94.7% for delivered plans compared to 97.3% for blinded re‐plans for 50 Gy in five fractions, and respectively 98.4% versus 99.2% for 54 Gy in three fractions. CONCLUSION: This study validated ML‐based OAR dose prediction for lung SBRT, showing potential for improved OAR dose sparing and more consistent plan quality using dose predictions for patient‐specific planning guidance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9195027
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91950272022-06-21 Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT Brodin, N. Patrik Schulte, Leslie Velten, Christian Martin, William Shen, Sydney Shen, Jin Basavatia, Amar Ohri, Nitin Garg, Madhur K. Carpenter, Colin Tomé, Wolfgang A. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics OBJECTIVE: To quantify the clinical performance of a machine learning (ML) algorithm for organ‐at‐risk (OAR) dose prediction for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and estimate the treatment planning benefit from having upfront access to these dose predictions. METHODS: ML models were trained using multi‐center data consisting of 209 patients previously treated with lung SBRT. Two prescription levels were investigated, 50 Gy in five fractions and 54 Gy in three fractions. Models were generated using a gradient‐boosted regression tree algorithm using grid searching with fivefold cross‐validation. Twenty patients not included in the training set were used to test OAR dose prediction performance, ten for each prescription. We also performed blinded re‐planning based on OAR dose predictions but without access to clinically delivered plans. Differences between predicted and delivered doses were assessed by root‐mean square deviation (RMSD), and statistical differences between predicted, delivered, and re‐planned doses were evaluated with one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests. RESULTS: ANOVA tests showed no significant differences between predicted, delivered, and replanned OAR doses (all p ≥ 0.36). The RMSD was 2.9, 3.9, 4.3, and 1.7Gy for max dose to the spinal cord, great vessels, heart, and trachea, respectively, for 50 Gy in five fractions. Average improvements of 1.0, 1.4, and 2.0 Gy were seen for spinal cord, esophagus, and trachea max doses in blinded replans compared to clinically delivered plans with 54 Gy in three fractions, and 1.8, 0.7, and 1.5 Gy, respectively, for the esophagus, heart and bronchus max doses with 50 Gy in five fractions. Target coverage was similar with an average PTV V100% of 94.7% for delivered plans compared to 97.3% for blinded re‐plans for 50 Gy in five fractions, and respectively 98.4% versus 99.2% for 54 Gy in three fractions. CONCLUSION: This study validated ML‐based OAR dose prediction for lung SBRT, showing potential for improved OAR dose sparing and more consistent plan quality using dose predictions for patient‐specific planning guidance. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9195027/ /pubmed/35460150 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13609 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Brodin, N. Patrik
Schulte, Leslie
Velten, Christian
Martin, William
Shen, Sydney
Shen, Jin
Basavatia, Amar
Ohri, Nitin
Garg, Madhur K.
Carpenter, Colin
Tomé, Wolfgang A.
Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT
title Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT
title_full Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT
title_fullStr Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT
title_full_unstemmed Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT
title_short Organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT
title_sort organ‐at‐risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung sbrt
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9195027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35460150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13609
work_keys_str_mv AT brodinnpatrik organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT schulteleslie organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT veltenchristian organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT martinwilliam organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT shensydney organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT shenjin organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT basavatiaamar organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT ohrinitin organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT gargmadhurk organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT carpentercolin organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt
AT tomewolfganga organatriskdosepredictionusingamachinelearningalgorithmclinicalvalidationandtreatmentplanningbenefitforlungsbrt