Identification of treatment error types for lung cancer patients using convolutional neural networks and EPID dosimetry

In vivo EPID-based daily treatment error identification for volumetric-modulated arc therapy in head and neck cancers with a hierarchical convolutional neural network: a feasibility study

We proposed a deep learning approach to classify various error types in daily VMAT treatment of head and neck cancer patients based on EPID dosimetry, which could provide additional information to support clinical decisions for adaptive planning. 146 arcs from 42 head and neck patients were analyzed. Anatomical changes and setup errors were simulated in 17,820 EPID images of 99 arcs obtained from 30 patients using in-house software for model training, validation, and testing. Subsequently, 141 clinical EPID images from 47 arcs belonging to the remaining 12 patients were utilized for clinical testing. The hierarchical convolutional neural network (HCNN) model was trained to classify error types and magnitudes using EPID dose difference maps. Gamma analysis with 3%/2 mm (dose difference/distance to agreement) criteria was also performed. The F1 score, a combination of precision and recall, was utilized to evaluate the performance of the HCNN model and gamma analysis. The adaptive fractioned doses were calculated to verify the HCNN classification results. For error type identification, the overall F1 score of the HCNN model was 0.99 and 0.91 for primary type and subtype identification, respectively. For error magnitude identification, the overall F1 score in the simulation dataset was 0.96 and 0.70 for the HCNN model and gamma analysis, respectively; while the overall F1 score in the clinical dataset was 0.79 and 0.20 for the HCNN model and gamma analysis, respectively. The HCNN model-based EPID dosimetry can identify changes in patient transmission doses and distinguish the treatment error category, which could potentially provide information for head and neck cancer treatment adaption.

Turning the attention to time-resolved EPID-images: treatment error classification with transformer multiple instance learning

Objective.The aim of this work was to develop a novel artificial intelligence-assistedin vivodosimetry method using time-resolved (TR) dose verification data to improve quality of external beam radiotherapy.Approach. Although threshold classification methods are commonly used in error classification, they may lead to missing errors due to the loss of information resulting from the compression of multi-dimensional electronic portal imaging device (EPID) data into one or a few numbers. Recent research has investigated the classification of errors on time-integrated (TI)in vivoEPID images, with convolutional neural networks showing promise. However, it has been observed previously that TI approaches may cancel out the error presence onγ-maps during dynamic treatments. To address this limitation, simulated TRγ-maps for each volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy angle were used to detect treatment errors caused by complex patient geometries and beam arrangements. Typically, such images can be interpreted as a set of segments where only set class labels are provided. Inspired by recent weakly supervised approaches on histopathology images, we implemented a transformer based multiple instance learning approach and utilized transfer learning from TI to TRγ-maps.Main results. The proposed algorithm performed well on classification of error type and error magnitude. The accuracy in the test set was up to 0.94 and 0.81 for 11 (error type) and 22 (error magnitude) classes of treatment errors, respectively.Significance. TR dose distributions can enhance treatment delivery decision-making, however manual data analysis is nearly impossible due to the complexity and quantity of this data. Our proposed model efficiently handles data complexity, substantially improving treatment error classification compared to models that leverage TI data.

Error detection for radiotherapy planning validation based on deep learning networks

BACKGROUND

Quality assurance (QA) of patient-specific treatment plans for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) necessitates prior validation. However, the standard methodology exhibits deficiencies and lacks sensitivity in the analysis of positional dose distribution data, leading to difficulties in accurately identifying reasons for plan verification failure. This issue complicates and impedes the efficiency of QA tasks.

PURPOSE

The primary aim of this research is to utilize deep learning algorithms for the extraction of 3D dose distribution maps and the creation of a predictive model for error classification across multiple machine models, treatment methodologies, and tumor locations.

METHOD

We devised five categories of validation plans (normal, gantry error, collimator error, couch error, and dose error), conforming to tolerance limits of different accuracy levels and employing 3D dose distribution data from a sample of 94 tumor patients. A CNN model was then constructed to predict the diverse error types, with predictions compared against the gamma pass rate (GPR) standard employing distinct thresholds (3%, 3 mm; 3%, 2 mm; 2%, 2 mm) to evaluate the model's performance. Furthermore, we appraised the model's robustness by assessing its functionality across diverse accelerators.

RESULTS

The accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 scores of CNN model performance were 0.907, 0.925, 0.907, and 0.908, respectively. Meanwhile, the performance on another device is 0.900, 0.918, 0.900, and 0.898. In addition, compared to the GPR method, the CNN model achieved better results in predicting different types of errors.

CONCLUSION

When juxtaposed with the GPR methodology, the CNN model exhibits superior predictive capability for classification in the validation of the radiation therapy plan on different devices. By using this model, the plan validation failures can be detected more rapidly and efficiently, minimizing the time required for QA tasks and serving as a valuable adjunct to overcome the constraints of the GPR method.

Treatment plan complexity quantification for predicting gamma passing rates in patient-specific quality assurance for stereotactic volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

To investigate the beam complexity of stereotactic Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans quantitively and predict gamma passing rates (GPRs) using machine learning.

METHODS

The entire dataset is exclusively made of stereotactic VMAT plans (301 plans with 594 beams) from Varian Edge LINAC. The GPRs were analyzed using Varian's portal dosimetry with 2%/2 mm criteria. A total of 27 metrics were calculated to investigate the correlation between metrics and GPRs. Random forest and gradient boosting models were developed and trained to predict the GPRs based on the extracted complexity features. The threshold values of complexity metric were obtained to predict a given beam to pass or fail from ROC curve analysis.

RESULTS

The three moderately significant values of Spearman's rank correlation to GPRs were 0.508 (p < 0.001), 0.445 (p < 0.001), and -0.416 (p < 0.001) for proposed metric LAAM, the ratio of the average aperture area over jaw area (AAJA) and index of modulation, respectively. The random forest method achieved 98.74% prediction accuracy with mean absolute error of 1.23% using five-fold cross-validation, and 98.71% with 1.25% for gradient boosting regressor method, respectively. LAAM, leaf travelling distance (LT), AAJA, LT modulation complexity score (LTMCS) and index of modulation, were the top five most important complexity features. The LAAM metric showed the best performance with AUC value of 0.801, and threshold value of 0.365.

CONCLUSIONS

The calculated metrics were effective in quantifying the complexity of stereotactic VMAT plans. We have demonstrated that the GPRs could be accurately predicted using machine learning methods based on extracted complexity metrics. The quantification of complexity and machine learning methods have the potential to improve stereotactic treatment planning and identify the failure of QA results promptly.

Deep learning-based tools to distinguish plan-specific from generic deviations in EPID-based in vivo dosimetry

BACKGROUND

Dose distributions calculated with electronic portal imaging device (EPID)-based in vivo dosimetry (EIVD) differ from planned dose distributions due to generic and plan-specific deviations. Generic deviations are characteristic to a class of plans. Examples include limitations in EIVD dose reconstruction, inaccuracies in treatment planning system (TPS) calculations and systematic machine deviations. Plan-specific deviations have an unpredictable character. Examples include discrepancies between the patient model used for dose calculation and the patient position or anatomy during delivery, random machine deviations, and data transfer, human or software errors. During the inspection work performed with traditional γ-evaluation statistical methods: (i) generic deviations raise alerts that need to be inspected but that rarely lead to action as their root cause is usually understood and (ii) the detection of relevant plan-specific deviations may be hindered by the presence of generic deviations.

PURPOSE

To investigate whether deep learning-based tools can help in identifying γ-alerts raised by generic deviations and in improving the detectability of plan-specific deviations.

METHODS

A 3D U-Net was trained as an autoencoder to reconstruct underlying patterns of generic deviations in γ-distributions. The network was trained for four treatment disease sites differently affected by generic deviations: volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) lung (no known deviations), VMAT prostate (TPS inaccuracies), VMAT head-and-neck (EIVD limitations) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) breast (large EIVD limitations). The network was trained with virtual non-transit γ-distributions: 60 train/10 validation for the VMAT sites and 30 train/10 validation for IMRT breast. It was hypothesized that in vivo γ-distributions obtained in the presence of plan-specific deviations would differ from those seen during training. For each disease site, the sensitivity of γ-analysis and the network to detect (synthetically introduced) patient-related deviations was compared by receiver operator characteristic analysis. The investigated deviations were patient positioning errors, weight gain or loss, and tumor volume changes. The clinical relevance was illustrated qualitatively with 793 in vivo clinical cases (141 lung, 136 head-and-neck, 209 prostate and 307 breast).

RESULTS

Error detectability of patient-related deviations was better with the network than with γ-analysis. The average area under the curve values over all sites were 0.86 ± 0.12(1SD) and 0.69 ± 0.25(1SD), respectively. Regarding in vivo clinical results, the percentage of cases differently classified by γ-analysis and the network was 1%, 19%, 18% and 64% for lung, head-and-neck, prostate, and breast, respectively. In head-and-neck and breast cases, 45 γ-only alerts were examined, of which 43 were attributed to EPID dose reconstruction limitations. For prostate, all 15 investigated γ-only alerts were due to known TPS inaccuracies. All 59 investigated network alerts were explained by either patient-related deviations or EPID acquisition incidents. Some patient-related deviations detected by the network were not detected by γ-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep learning-based tools trained to reconstruct underlying patterns of generic deviations in γ-distributions can be used to (i) automatically identify false positives within the set of γ-alerts and (ii) improve the detection of plan-specific deviations, hence minimizing the likelihood of false negatives. The presented method provides clear additional value to the γ-alert management process for large scale EIVD systems.

A 3D transfer learning approach for identifying multiple simultaneous errors during radiotherapy

Objective. Deep learning models, such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), can take full dose comparison images as input and have shown promising results for error identification during treatment. Clinically, complex scenarios should be considered, with the risk of multiple anatomical and/or mechanical errors occurring simultaneously during treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the capability of CNN-based error identification in this more complex scenario.Approach. For 40 lung cancer patients, clinically realistic ranges of combinations of various treatment errors within treatment plans and/or computed tomography (CT) images were simulated. Modified CT images and treatment plans were used to predict 2580 3D dose distributions, which were compared to dose distributions without errors using various gamma analysis criteria and relative dose difference as dose comparison methods. A 3D CNN capable of multilabel classification was trained to identify treatment errors at two classification levels, using dose comparison volumes as input: Level 1 (main error type, e.g. anatomical change, mechanical error) and Level 2 (error subtype, e.g. tumor regression, patient rotation). For training the CNNs, a transfer learning approach was employed. An ensemble model was also evaluated, which consisted of three separate CNNs each taking a region of interest of the dose comparison volume as input. Model performance was evaluated by calculating sample F1-scores for training and validation sets.Main results. The model had high F1-scores for Level 1 classification, but performance for Level 2 was lower, and overfitting became more apparent. Using relative dose difference instead of gamma volumes as input improved performance for Level 2 classification, whereas using an ensemble model additionally reduced overfitting. The models obtained F1-scores of 0.86 and 0.62 on an independent test set for Level 1 and Level 2, respectively.Significance. This study shows that it is possible to identify multiple errors occurring simultaneously in 3D dose verification data.

"Under the hood": artificial intelligence in personalized radiotherapy

This review presents and discusses the ways in which artificial intelligence (AI) tools currently intervene, or could potentially intervene in the future, to enhance the diverse tasks involved in the radiotherapy workflow. The radiotherapy framework is presented on 2 different levels for the personalization of the treatment, distinct in tasks and methodologies. The first level is the clinically well-established anatomy-based workflow, known as adaptive radiation therapy. The second level is referred to as biology-driven workflow, explored in the research literature and recently appearing in some preliminary clinical trials for personalized radiation treatments. A 2-fold role for AI is defined according to these 2 different levels. In the anatomy-based workflow, the role of AI is to streamline and improve the tasks in terms of time and variability reductions compared to conventional methodologies. The biology-driven workflow instead fully relies on AI, which introduces decision-making tools opening uncharted frontiers that were in the past deemed challenging to explore. These methodologies are referred to as radiomics and dosiomics, handling imaging and dosimetric information, or multiomics, when complemented by clinical and biological parameters (ie, biomarkers). The review explicitly highlights the methodologies that are currently incorporated into clinical practice or still in research, with the aim of presenting the AI's growing role in personalized radiotherapy.

Deep learning-based detection and classification of multi-leaf collimator modeling errors in volumetric modulated radiation therapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to create and evaluate deep learning-based models to detect and classify errors of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) modeling parameters in volumetric modulated radiation therapy (VMAT), namely the transmission factor (TF) and the dosimetric leaf gap (DLG).

METHODS

A total of 33 clinical VMAT plans for prostate and head-and-neck cancer were used, assuming a cylindrical and homogeneous phantom, and error plans were created by altering the original value of the TF and the DLG by ± 10, 20, and 30% in the treatment planning system (TPS). The Gaussian filters ofσ = 0.5 $\sigma = 0.5$ and 1.0 were applied to the planar dose maps of the error-free plan to mimic the measurement dose map, and thus dose difference maps between the error-free and error plans were obtained. We evaluated 3 deep learning-based models, created to perform the following detections/classifications: (1) error-free versus TF error, (2) error-free versus DLG error, and (3) TF versus DLG error. Models to classify the sign of the errors were also created and evaluated. A gamma analysis was performed for comparison.

RESULTS

The detection and classification of TF and DLG error were feasible forσ = 0.5 $\sigma = 0.5$ ; however, a considerable reduction of accuracy was observed forσ = 1.0 $\sigma = 1.0$ depending on the magnitude of error and treatment site. The sign of errors was detectable by the specifically trained models forσ = 0.5 $\sigma = 0.5$ and 1.0. The gamma analysis could not detect errors.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that the deep learning-based models could feasibly detect and classify TF and DLG errors in VMAT dose distributions, depending on the magnitude of the error, treatment site, and the degree of mimicked measurement doses.

Towards real-time EPID-based 3D in vivo dosimetry for IMRT with Deep Neural Networks: A feasibility study

We investigate the potential of the Deep Dose Estimate (DDE) neural network to predict 3D dose distributions inside patients with Monte Carlo (MC) accuracy, based on transmitted EPID signals and patient CTs. The network was trained using as input patient CTs and first-order dose approximations (FOD). Accurate dose distributions (ADD) simulated with MC were given as training targets. 83 pelvic CTs were used to simulate ADDs and respective EPID signals for subfields of prostate IMRT plans (gantry at 0∘). FODs were produced as backprojections from the EPID signals. 581 ADD-FOD sets were produced and divided into training and test sets. An additional dataset simulated with gantry at 90∘ (lateral set) was used for evaluating the performance of the DDE at different beam directions. The quality of the FODs and DDE-predicted dose distributions (DDEP) with respect to ADDs, from the test and lateral sets, was evaluated with gamma analysis (3%,2 mm). The passing rates between FODs and ADDs were as low as 46%, while for DDEPs the passing rates were above 97% for the test set. Meaningful improvements were also observed for the lateral set. The high passing rates for DDEPs indicate that the DDE is able to convert FODs into ADDs. Moreover, the trained DDE predicts the dose inside a patient CT within 0.6 s/subfield (GPU), in contrast to 14 h needed for MC (CPU-cluster). 3D in vivo dose distributions due to clinical patient irradiation can be obtained within seconds, with MC-like accuracy, potentially paving the way towards real-time EPID-based in vivo dosimetry.

IPEM topical report: guidance for the clinical implementation of online treatment monitoring solutions for IMRT/VMAT

This report provides guidance for the implementation of online treatment monitoring (OTM) solutions in radiotherapy (RT), with a focus on modulated treatments. Support is provided covering the implementation process, from identification of an OTM solution to local implementation strategy. Guidance has been developed by a RT special interest group (RTSIG) working party (WP) on behalf of the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM). Recommendations within the report are derived from the experience of the WP members (in consultation with manufacturers, vendors and user groups), existing guidance or legislation and a UK survey conducted in 2020 (Stevenset al2021). OTM is an inclusive term representing any system capable of providing a direct or inferred measurement of the delivered dose to a RT patient. Information on each type of OTM is provided but, commensurate with UK demand, guidance is largely influenced byin vivodosimetry methods utilising the electronic portal imager device (EPID). Sections are included on the choice of OTM solutions, acceptance and commissioning methods with recommendations on routine quality control, analytical methods and tolerance setting, clinical introduction and staffing/resource requirements. The guidance aims to give a practical solution to sensitivity and specificity testing. Functionality is provided for the user to introduce known errors into treatment plans for local testing. Receiver operating characteristic analysis is discussed as a tool to performance assess OTM systems. OTM solutions can help verify the correct delivery of radiotherapy treatment. Furthermore, modern systems are increasingly capable of providing clinical decision-making information which can impact the course of a patient's treatment. However, technical limitations persist. It is not within the scope of this guidance to critique each available solution, but the user is encouraged to carefully consider workflow and engage with manufacturers in resolving compatibility issues.

AAPM Task Group Report 307: Use of EPIDs for Patient-Specific IMRT and VMAT QA

PURPOSE

Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) have been widely utilized for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) and their use for transit dosimetry applications is emerging. Yet there are no specific guidelines on the potential uses, limitations, and correct utilization of EPIDs for these purposes. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 307 (TG-307) provides a comprehensive review of the physics, modeling, algorithms and clinical experience with EPID-based pre-treatment and transit dosimetry techniques. This review also includes the limitations and challenges in the clinical implementation of EPIDs, including recommendations for commissioning, calibration and validation, routine QA, tolerance levels for gamma analysis and risk-based analysis.

METHODS

Characteristics of the currently available EPID systems and EPID-based PSQA techniques are reviewed. The details of the physics, modeling, and algorithms for both pre-treatment and transit dosimetry methods are discussed, including clinical experience with different EPID dosimetry systems. Commissioning, calibration, and validation, tolerance levels and recommended tests, are reviewed, and analyzed. Risk-based analysis for EPID dosimetry is also addressed.

RESULTS

Clinical experience, commissioning methods and tolerances for EPID-based PSQA system are described for pre-treatment and transit dosimetry applications. The sensitivity, specificity, and clinical results for EPID dosimetry techniques are presented as well as examples of patient-related and machine-related error detection by these dosimetry solutions. Limitations and challenges in clinical implementation of EPIDs for dosimetric purposes are discussed and acceptance and rejection criteria are outlined. Potential causes of and evaluations of pre-treatment and transit dosimetry failures are discussed. Guidelines and recommendations developed in this report are based on the extensive published data on EPID QA along with the clinical experience of the TG-307 members.

CONCLUSION

TG-307 focused on the commercially available EPID-based dosimetric tools and provides guidance for medical physicists in the clinical implementation of EPID-based patient-specific pre-treatment and transit dosimetry QA solutions including intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments.

Development of a deep learning-based error detection system without error dose maps in the patient-specific quality assurance of volumetric modulated arc therapy

To detect errors in patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), we proposed an error detection method based on dose distribution analysis using unsupervised deep learning approach and analyzed 161 prostate VMAT beams measured with a cylindrical detector. For performing error simulation, in addition to error-free dose distribution, dose distributions containing nine types of error, including multileaf collimator (MLC) positional errors, gantry rotation errors, radiation output errors and phantom setup errors, were generated. Only error-free data were employed for the model training, and error-free and error data were employed for the tests. As a deep learning model, the variational autoencoder (VAE) was adopted. The anomaly of test data was quantified by calculating Mahalanobis distance based on the feature vectors acquired from a trained encoder. Based on this anomaly, test data were classified as 'error-free' or 'any-error.' For comparison with conventional approaches, gamma (γ)-analysis was performed, and supervised learning convolutional neural network (S-CNN) was constructed. Receiver operating characteristic curves were obtained to evaluate their performance with the area under the curve (AUC). For all error types, except systematic MLC positional and radiation output errors, the performance of the methods was in the order of S-CNN ˃ VAE-based ˃ γ-analysis (only S-CNN required error data for model training). For example, in random MLC positional error simulation, the AUC of our method, S-CNN and γ-analysis were 0.699, 0.921 and 0.669, respectively. Our results showed that the VAE-based method has the potential to detect errors in patient-specific VMAT QA.

Automatic quality assurance of radiotherapy treatment plans using Bayesian networks: A multi-institutional study

Purpose

Artificial intelligence applications in radiation oncology have been the focus of study in the last decade. The introduction of automated and intelligent solutions for routine clinical tasks, such as treatment planning and quality assurance, has the potential to increase safety and efficiency of radiotherapy. In this work, we present a multi-institutional study across three different institutions internationally on a Bayesian network (BN)-based initial plan review assistive tool that alerts radiotherapy professionals for potential erroneous or suboptimal treatment plans.

Methods

Clinical data were collected from the oncology information systems in three institutes in Europe (Maastro clinic - 8753 patients treated between 2012 and 2020) and the United States of America (University of Vermont Medical Center [UVMMC] - 2733 patients, University of Washington [UW] - 6180 patients, treated between 2018 and 2021). We trained the BN model to detect potential errors in radiotherapy treatment plans using different combinations of institutional data and performed single-site and cross-site validation with simulated plans with embedded errors. The simulated errors consisted of three different categories: i) patient setup, ii) treatment planning and iii) prescription. We also compared the strategy of using only diagnostic parameters or all variables as evidence for the BN. We evaluated the model performance utilizing the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results

The best network performance was observed when the BN model is trained and validated using the dataset in the same center. In particular, the testing and validation using UVMMC data has achieved an AUC of 0.92 with all parameters used as evidence. In cross-validation studies, we observed that the BN model performed better when it was trained and validated in institutes with similar technology and treatment protocols (for instance, when testing on UVMMC data, the model trained on UW data achieved an AUC of 0.84, compared with an AUC of 0.64 for the model trained on Maastro data). Also, combining training data from larger clinics (UW and Maastro clinic) and using it on smaller clinics (UVMMC) leads to satisfactory performance with an AUC of 0.85. Lastly, we found that in general the BN model performed better when all variables are considered as evidence.

Conclusion

We have developed and validated a Bayesian network model to assist initial treatment plan review using multi-institutional data with different technology and clinical practices. The model has shown good performance even when trained on data from clinics with divergent profiles, suggesting that the model is able to adapt to different data distributions.

A markerless beam's eye view tumor tracking algorithm based on unsupervised deformable registration learning framework of VoxelMorph in medical image with partial data

PURPOSE

To propose an unsupervised deformable registration learning framework-based markerless beam's eye view (BEV) tumor tracking algorithm for the inferior quality megavolt (MV) images with occlusion and deformation.

METHODS

Quality assurance (QA) plans for thorax phantom were delivered to the linear accelerator with artificially treatment offsets. Electronic portal imaging device (EPID) images (682 in total) and corresponding digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) were gathered as the moving and fixed image pairs, which were randomly divided into training and testing set in a ratio of 0.7:0.3 to train a non-rigid registration model with Voxelmorph. Simultaneously, 533 pairs of patient images from 21 lung tumor plans were acquired for tumor tracking investigation to offer quantifiable tumor motion data. Tracking error and image similarity measures were employed to evaluate the algorithm's accuracy.

RESULTS

The tracking algorithm can handle image registration with non-rigid deformation and losses ranging from 10 % to 80 %. The tracking errors in the phantom study were below 3 mm in about 86.8 % of cases, and below 2 mm in about 80 % of cases. The normalized mutual information (NMI) changes from 1.182 ± 0.024 to 1.198 ± 0.024 (p < 0.005). The patient target had an average translation of 3.784 mm and a maximum comprehensive displacement value of 7.455 mm. NMI of patient images changes from 1.209 ± 0.027 to 1.217 ± 0.026 (p < 0.005), indicating the presence of non-negligible non-rigid deformation.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides a robust markerless tumor tracking algorithm for multi-modal, partial data and inferior quality image processing.

What is the optimal input information for deep learning-based pre-treatment error identification in radiotherapy?

•

The choice of dose comparison method impacts deep learning error identification accuracy most.

•

Simple dose comparison methods are more beneficial than gamma analysis and alternative methods.

•

Mean/standard deviation normalization and high image resolution improve error identification.

Background and purpose

Deep learning (DL) provides high sensitivity for detecting and identifying errors in pre-treatment radiotherapy quality assurance (QA). This work’s objective was to systematically evaluate the impact of different dose comparison and image preprocessing methods on DL model performance for error identification in pre-treatment QA.

Materials and methods

For 53 volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and 69 stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment plans of lung cancer patients, mechanical errors were simulated (MLC leaf positions, monitor unit scaling, collimator rotation). Two classification levels were assessed: error type (Level 1) and error magnitude (Level 2). Portal dose images with and without errors were compared using standard (gamma analysis), simple (absolute/relative dose difference, ratio) and alternative (distance-to-agreement, structural similarity index, gradient) dose comparison methods. For preprocessing, different normalization methods (min/max and mean/standard deviation) and image resolutions (32 × 32, 64 × 64 and 128 × 128) were evaluated. All possible combinations of classification level, dose comparison, normalization method and image size resulted in 144 input datasets for DL networks for error identification.

Results

Average accuracy was highest for simple dose comparison methods (Level 1: 97.7%, Level 2: 78.1%) while alternative methods scored lowest (Level 1: 91.6%, Level 2: 71.2%). Mean/stdev normalization particularly improved Level 2 classification. Higher image resolution improved error identification, although for SBRT lower image resolution was also sufficient.

Conclusions

The choice of dose comparison method has the largest impact on error identification for pre-treatment QA using DL, compared to image preprocessing. Model performance can improve by using simple dose comparison methods, mean/stdev normalization and high image resolution.

Transit-guided radiation therapy: proof of concept of an on-line technique for correcting position errors using transit portal images

Objective. Transit in vivo dosimetry methods monitor that the dose distribution is delivered as planned. However, they have a limited ability to identify and to quantify the cause of a given disagreement, especially those caused by position errors. This paper describes a proof of concept of a simple in vivo technique to infer a position error from a transit portal image (TPI). Approach. For a given treatment field, the impact of a position error is modeled as a perturbation of the corresponding reference (unperturbed) TPI. The perturbation model determines the patient translation, described by a shift vector, by comparing a given in vivo TPI to the corresponding reference TPI. Patient rotations can also be determined by applying this formalism to independent regions of interest over the patient. Eight treatment plans have been delivered to an anthropomorphic phantom under a large set of couch shifts (<15 mm) and rotations (<10°) to experimentally validate this technique, which we have named Transit-Guided Radiation Therapy (TGRT). Main results. The root mean squared error (RMSE) between the determined and the true shift magnitudes was 1.0/2.4/4.9 mm for true shifts ranging between 0–5/5–10/10–15 mm, respectively. The angular accuracy of the determined shift directions was 12° ± 14°. The RMSE between the determined and the true rotations was 0.5°. The TGRT technique decoupled translations and rotations satisfactorily. In 96% of the cases, the TGRT technique decreased the existing position error. The detection threshold of the TGRT technique was around 1 mm and it was nearly independent of the tumor site, delivery technique, beam energy or patient thickness. Significance. TGRT is a promising technique that not only provides reliable determinations of the position errors without increasing the required equipment, acquisition time or patient dose, but it also adds on-line correction capabilities to existing methods currently using TPIs.

Deep Neural Network with Structural Similarity Difference and Orientation-based Loss for Position Error Classification in The Radiotherapy of Graves' Ophthalmopathy Patients

Identifying position errors for Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO) patients using electronic portal imaging device (EPID) transmission fluence maps is helpful in monitoring treatment.} However, most of the existing models only extract features from dose difference maps computed from EPID images, which do not fully characterize all information of the positional errors. In addition, the position error has a three-dimensional spatial nature, which has never been explored in previous work. To address the above problems, a deep neural network (DNN) model with structural similarity difference and orientation-based loss is proposed in this paper, which consists of a feature extraction network and a feature enhancement network. To capture more information, three types of Structural SIMilarity (SSIM) sub-index maps are computed to enhance the luminance, contrast, and structural features of EPID images, respectively. These maps and the dose difference maps are fed into different networks to extract radiomic features. To acquire spatial features of the position errors, an orientation-based loss function is proposed for optimal training. It makes the data distribution more consistent with the realistic 3D space by integrating the error deviations of the predicted values in the left-right, superior-inferior, anterior-posterior directions. Experimental results on a constructed dataset demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model, compared with other related models and existing state-of-the-art methods.

Analysis of EPID Transmission Fluence Maps Using Machine Learning Models and CNN for Identifying Position Errors in the Treatment of GO Patients

Purpose

To find a suitable method for analyzing electronic portal imaging device (EPID) transmission fluence maps for the identification of position errors in the in vivo dose monitoring of patients with Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO).

Methods

Position errors combining 0-, 2-, and 4-mm errors in the left-right (LR), anterior-posterior (AP), and superior-inferior (SI) directions in the delivery of 40 GO patient radiotherapy plans to a human head phantom were simulated and EPID transmission fluence maps were acquired. Dose difference (DD) and structural similarity (SSIM) maps were calculated to quantify changes in the fluence maps. Three types of machine learning (ML) models that utilize radiomics features of the DD maps (ML 1 models), features of the SSIM maps (ML 2 models), and features of both DD and SSIM maps (ML 3 models) as inputs were used to perform three types of position error classification, namely a binary classification of the isocenter error (type 1), three binary classifications of LR, SI, and AP direction errors (type 2), and an eight-element classification of the combined LR, SI, and AP direction errors (type 3). Convolutional neural network (CNN) was also used to classify position errors using the DD and SSIM maps as input.

Results

The best-performing ML 1 model was XGBoost, which achieved accuracies of 0.889, 0.755, 0.778, 0.833, and 0.532 in the type 1, type 2-LR, type 2-AP, type 2-SI, and type 3 classification, respectively. The best ML 2 model was XGBoost, which achieved accuracies of 0.856, 0.731, 0.736, 0.949, and 0.491, respectively. The best ML 3 model was linear discriminant classifier (LDC), which achieved accuracies of 0.903, 0.792, 0.870, 0.931, and 0.671, respectively. The CNN achieved classification accuracies of 0.925, 0.833, 0.875, 0.949, and 0.689, respectively.

Conclusion

ML models and CNN using combined DD and SSIM maps can analyze EPID transmission fluence maps to identify position errors in the treatment of GO patients. Further studies with large sample sizes are needed to improve the accuracy of CNN.

Radiomics analysis of EPID measurements for patient positioning error detection in thyroid associated ophthalmopathy radiotherapy

PURPOSE

Electronic portal imaging detector (EPID)-based patient positioning verification is an important component of safe radiotherapy treatment delivery. In computer simulation studies, learning-based approaches have proven to be superior to conventional gamma analysis in the detection of positioning errors. To approximate a clinical scenario, the detectability of positioning errors via EPID measurements was assessed using radiomics analysis for patients with thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy.

METHODS

Treatment plans of 40 patients with thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy were delivered to a solid anthropomorphic head phantom. To simulate positioning errors, combinations of 0-, 2-, and 4-mm translation errors in the left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions were introduced to the phantom. The positioning errors-induced dose differences between measured portal dose images were used to predict the magnitude and direction of positioning errors. The detectability of positioning errors was assessed via radiomics analysis of the dose differences. Three classification models-support vector machine (SVM), k-nearest neighbors (KNN), and XGBoost-were used for the detection of positioning errors (positioning errors larger or smaller than 3 mm in an arbitrary direction) and direction classification (positioning errors larger or smaller than 3 mm in a specific direction). The receiver operating characteristic curve and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of classification models.

RESULTS

For the detection of positioning errors, the AUC values of SVM, KNN, and XGBoost models were all above 0.90. For LR, SI, and AP direction classification, the highest AUC values were 0.76, 0.91, and 0.80, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined radiomics and machine learning approaches are capable of detecting the magnitude and direction of positioning errors from EPID measurements. This study is a further step toward machine learning-based positioning error detection during treatment delivery with EPID measurements.

Error detection model developed using a multi-task convolutional neural network in patient-specific quality assurance for volumetric-modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

In patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for static beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), machine-learning-based dose analysis methods have been developed to identify the cause of an error as an alternative to gamma analysis. Although these new methods have revealed that the cause of the error can be identified by analyzing the dose distribution obtained from the two-dimensional detector, they have not been extended to the analysis of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) QA. In this study, we propose a deep learning approach to detect various types of errors in patient-specific VMAT QA.

METHODS

A total of 161 beams from 104 prostate VMAT plans were analyzed. All beams were measured using a cylindrical detector (Delta4; ScandiDos, Uppsala, Sweden), and predicted dose distributions in a cylindrical phantom were calculated using a treatment planning system (TPS). In addition to the error-free plan, we simulated 12 types of errors: two types of multileaf collimator positional errors (systematic or random leaf offset of 2 mm), two types of monitor unit (MU) scaling errors (±3%), two types of gantry rotation errors (±2° in clockwise and counterclockwise direction), and six types of phantom setup errors (±1 mm in lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions). The error-introduced predicted dose distributions were created by editing the calculated dose distributions using a TPS with in-house software. Those 13 types of dose difference maps, consisting of an error-free map and 12 error maps, were created from the measured and predicted dose distributions and were used to train the convolutional neural network (CNN) model. Our model was a multi-task model that individually detected each of the 12 types of errors. Two datasets, Test sets 1 and 2, were prepared to evaluate the performance of the model. Test set 1 consisted of 13 types of dose maps used for training, whereas Test set 2 included the dose maps with 25 types of errors in addition to the error-free dose map. The dose map, which introduced 25 types of errors, was generated by combining two of the 12 types of simulated errors. For comparison with the performance of our model, gamma analysis was performed for Test sets 1 and 2 with the criteria set to 3%/2 mm and 2%/1 mm (dose difference/distance to agreement).

RESULTS

For Test set 1, the overall accuracy of our CNN model, gamma analysis with the criteria set to 3%/2 mm, and gamma analysis with the criteria set to 2%/1 mm was 0.92, 0.19, and 0.81, respectively. Similarly, for Test set 2, the overall accuracy was 0.44, 0.42, and 0.95, respectively. Our model outperformed gamma analysis in the classification of dose maps containing a single type error, and the performance of our model was inferior in the classification of dose maps containing compound errors.

CONCLUSIONS

A multi-task CNN model for detecting errors in patient-specific VMAT QA using a cylindrical measuring device was constructed, and its performance was evaluated. Our results demonstrate that our model was effective in identifying the error type in the dose map for VMAT QA.