Balancing Quality and Efficiency of Head and Neck Contour Revision for Online Adaptive Radiotherapy

Abstract

The number of target and organs-at-risk (OAR) structures requiring contours is a barrier to online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) implementation for head and neck (H&N) cancer. In sharing our experience utilizing a cone beam CT-based oART system featuring automatic contours, we analyzed the system's clinical performance and the dosimetric benefits of human supervision to investigate the optimal balance between contour editing and plan quality. We analyzed 44 H&N patients and 349 adaptive fractions treated on the oART system. The unsupervised (automatically generated) and supervised (edited by clinicians) target and OAR contours as well as the corresponding adaptive plans were acquired. Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff Distance (HD) used to assess the geometric extent of contour supervision. We mapped the clinically treated adaptive plan to the unsupervised contours to quantify the dosimetric effect of the contour edits, and the adaptive plan optimized from the unsupervised contours to the supervised contours to simulate an unsupervised workflow. The targets were edited in >80.7% of the sessions, with the most changes seen in the primary GTV (DSC = 0.86 ± 0.09 and HD = 2.77 ± 1.58 mm) and the least in the nodal CTV (DSC = 0.92 ± 0.06, HD = 2.29 ± 1.49 mm). Among OARs, oral cavity was the most frequently edited (49.0%) and brainstem the least (2.2%). In general, OAR edits were minor (mean DSC > 0.95 with std Dosimetric quantification of the edits (Table 1) showed that while the unsupervised targets resulted in significant coverage loss, the change in unsupervised OAR dose was not as pronounced, with 81.5-96.8% still meeting the preplan constraints. Edits corresponding to major dose changes were mostly adjacent to or inside targets. The unsupervised workflow underdosed the targets and overdosed the OARs, and therefore is not recommended. While target contours needed physician supervision in H&N oART, edits to automatic OAR contours were minor. An alternative contour workflow could be adopted to focus on the targets and reduce time spent on the OARs. For OAR close to or overlapping with the targets, strategic cropping could potentially minimize time for editing and improve the robustness of the adapted plan quality.