Abstract

PurposeConsistent training and testing datasets can lead to good performance for deep learning (DL) models. However, a large high-quality training dataset for unusual clinical scenarios is usually not easy to collect. The work aims to find optimal training data collection strategies for DL-based dose prediction models.Materials and MethodsA total of 325 clinically approved cervical IMRT plans were utilized. We designed comparison experiments to investigate the impact of (1) beam angles, (2) the number of beams, and (3) patient position for DL dose prediction models. In addition, a novel geometry-based beam mask generation method was proposed to provide beam setting information in the model training process. What is more, we proposed a new training strategy named “full-database pre-trained strategy”.ResultsThe model trained with a homogeneous dataset with the same beam settings achieved the best performance [mean prediction errors of planning target volume (PTV), bladder, and rectum: 0.29 ± 0.15%, 3.1 ± 2.55%, and 3.15 ± 1.69%] compared with that trained with large mixed beam setting plans (mean errors of PTV, bladder, and rectum: 0.8 ± 0.14%, 5.03 ± 2.2%, and 4.45 ± 1.4%). A homogeneous dataset is more accessible to train an accurate dose prediction model (mean errors of PTV, bladder and rectum: 2.2 ± 0.15%, 5 ± 2.1%, and 3.23 ± 1.53%) than a non-homogeneous one (mean errors of PTV, bladder and rectum: 2.55 ± 0.12%, 6.33 ± 2.46%, and 4.76 ± 2.91%) without other processing approaches. The added beam mask can constantly improve the model performance, especially for datasets with different beam settings (mean errors of PTV, bladder, and rectum improved from 0.8 ± 0.14%, 5.03 ± 2.2%, and 4.45 ± 1.4% to 0.29 ± 0.15%, 3.1 ± 2.55%, and 3.15 ± 1.69%).ConclusionsA consistent dataset is recommended to form a patient-specific IMRT dose prediction model. When a consistent dataset is not accessible to collect, a large dataset with different beam angles and a training model with beam information can also get a relatively good model. The full-database pre-trained strategies can rapidly form an accuracy model from a pre-trained model. The proposed beam mask can effectively improve the model performance. Our study may be helpful for further dose prediction studies in terms of training strategies or database establishment.

Highlights

  • In recent decades, with the emergence and development of advanced radiotherapy (RT) planning and delivery techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), the quality of radiotherapy plans has drastically improved with better target volume dose coverage and normal tissue sparing (1, 2)

  • In addition to the image and contouring mask as model inputs, we proposed a novel generation method of beam mask to feed the extra beam setting information to the deep learning (DL) model training, which is in a logic of clinical scenarios to predict dose distribution

  • This study aimed to analyze the impact of classifying training databases on the performance of DL models for dose prediction in the framework of radiotherapy for cervical cancer

Read more

Summary

Introduction

With the emergence and development of advanced radiotherapy (RT) planning and delivery techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), the quality of radiotherapy plans has drastically improved with better target volume dose coverage and normal tissue sparing (1, 2). The trial-and-error planning process (5, 6) highly depends on the skills and experience of the planners. It is time-consuming and labor-intensive, and results in significant variations in plan quality (7, 8). The clinical application of this method is limited because of the unsatisfying output as only one-dimensional DVH, rather than the 3D dose distributions (15) and the need for manual interventions, such as planning target volume (PTV)-organ at risk (OAR) distance and PTV’s length (16, 17). Many studies have shown the significant success of various DL methods in predicting 3D dose distributions for different treatment sites and delivery methods (3, 19, 20)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.