Error detection and classification in patient-specific IMRT QA with dual neural networks

被引:27
|
作者
Potter, Nicholas J. [1 ]
Mund, Karl [1 ]
Andreozzi, Jacqueline M. [1 ]
Li, Jonathan G. [1 ]
Liu, Chihray [1 ]
Yan, Guanghua [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Dept Radiat Oncol, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
关键词
classification; error detection; IMRT QA; machine learning; QUALITY-ASSURANCE; QUANTITATIVE-EVALUATION; RADIOMIC ANALYSIS; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSIMETRY; DELIVERY;
D O I
10.1002/mp.14416
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose Despite being the standard metric in patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), gamma analysis has two shortcomings: (a) it lacks sensitivity to small but clinically relevant errors (b) it does not provide efficient means to classify the error sources. The purpose of this work is to propose a dual neural network method to achieve simultaneous error detection and classification in patient-specific IMRT QA. Methods For a pair of dose distributions, we extracted the dose difference histogram (DDH) for the low dose gradient region and two signed distance-to-agreement (sDTA) maps (one in x direction and one in y direction) for the high dose gradient region. An artificial neural network (ANN) and a convolutional neural network (CNN) were designed to analyze the DDH and the two sDTA maps, respectively. The ANN was trained to detect and classify six classes of dosimetric errors: incorrect multileaf collimator (MLC) transmission (+/- 1%) and four types of monitor unit (MU) scaling errors (+/- 1% and +/- 2%). The CNN was trained to detect and classify seven classes of spatial errors: incorrect effective source size, 1 mm MLC leaf bank overtravel or undertravel, 2 mm single MLC leaf overtravel or undertravel, and device misalignment errors (1 mm in x- or y direction). An in-house planar dose calculation software was used to simulate measurements with errors and noise introduced. Both networks were trained and validated with 13 IMRT plans (totaling 88 fields). A fivefold cross-validation technique was used to evaluate their accuracy. Results Distinct features were found in the DDH and the sDTA maps. The ANN perfectly identified all four types of MU scaling errors and the specific accuracies for the classes of no error, MLC transmission increase, MLC transmission decrease were 98.9%, 96.6%, and 94.3%, respectively. For the CNN, the largest confusion occurred between the 1-mm-MLC bank overtravel class and the 1-mm-device alignment error in x-direction class, which brought the specific accuracies down to 90.9% and 92.0%, respectively. The specific accuracy for the 2-mm-single MLC leaf undertravel class was 93.2% as it misclassified 5.7% of the class as being error free (false negative). Otherwise, the specific accuracy was above 95%. The overall accuracies across the fivefold were 98.3 +/- 0.7% and 95.6% +/- 1.5% for the ANN and the CNN, respectively. Conclusions Both the DDH and the sDTA maps are suitable features for error classification in IMRT QA. The proposed dual neural network method achieved simultaneous error detection and classification with excellent accuracy. It could be used in complement with the gamma analysis to potentially shift the IMRT QA paradigm from passive pass/fail analysis to active error detection and root cause identification.
引用
收藏
页码:4711 / 4720
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Moving from measurements toward independent computer calculations for patient-specific IMRT QA
    Pawlicki, T.
    Yoo, S.
    Russell, J.
    Boyer, A.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2006, 33 (06) : 2123 - 2124
  • [32] Verification and documentation for patient-specific IMRT QA using varis and portal vision systems
    Nurushev, T
    Kim, J
    Yin, FF
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (06) : 1501 - 1501
  • [33] Machine Learning with Radiomic Features to Detect the Types of Errors in IMRT Patient-Specific QA
    Sakai, M.
    Koarai, H.
    Ueda, M.
    Shigeta, S.
    Nakano, H.
    Takizawa, T.
    Tanabe, S.
    Sasamoto, R.
    Aoyama, H.
    Utsunomiya, S.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2019, 46 (06) : E196 - E196
  • [34] The Extraction of True Profiles for TPS Commissioning and Its Impact On IMRT Patient-Specific QA
    Yan, G.
    Fox, C.
    Liu, C.
    Li, J. G.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2008, 35 (06)
  • [35] Error detection sensitivity test using complex errors on three patient-specific VMAT QA systems
    Thongsawad, S.
    Srisatit, S.
    Fuangrod, T.
    INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE, 2019, 1285
  • [36] PATIENT-SPECIFIC ECG CLASSIFICATION BASED ON RECURRENT NEURAL NETWORKS AND CLUSTERING TECHNIQUE
    Zhang, Chenshuang
    Wang, Guijin
    Zhao, Jingwei
    Gao, Pengfei
    Lin, Jianping
    Yang, Huazhong
    2017 13TH IASTED INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING (BIOMED), 2017, : 63 - 67
  • [37] Dose Prediction for Patient-Specific QA Using a Convolutional Neural Network
    Mund, K.
    Yan, G.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (06) : E748 - E748
  • [38] Predicting the error magnitude in patient-specific QA during radiotherapy based on ResNet
    Huang, Ying
    Pi, Yifei
    Ma, Kui
    Miao, Xiaojuan
    Fu, Sichao
    Feng, Aihui
    Duan, Yanhua
    Kong, Qing
    Zhuo, Weihai
    Xu, Zhiyong
    JOURNAL OF X-RAY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 32 (03) : 797 - 807
  • [39] PATIENT-SPECIFIC QA FOR ADAPTIVE RADIOTHERAPY
    van Elmpt, W.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2011, 99 : S234 - S234
  • [40] Patient-Specific QA Devices/Software
    Desai, Vimal
    Thrower, Sara
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06)