...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics >What is the best way to contour lung tumors on PET scans? Multiobserver validation of a gradient-based method using a NSCLC digital PET phantom
【24h】

What is the best way to contour lung tumors on PET scans? Multiobserver validation of a gradient-based method using a NSCLC digital PET phantom

机译:在PET扫描上轮廓化肺肿瘤的最佳方法是什么?使用NSCLC数字PET体模的基于梯度的方法的多观察者验证

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy and consistency of a gradient-based positron emission tomography (PET) segmentation method, GRADIENT, compared with manual (MANUAL) and constant threshold (THRESHOLD) methods. Methods and Materials: Contouring accuracy was evaluated with sphere phantoms and clinically realistic Monte Carlo PET phantoms of the thorax. The sphere phantoms were 10-37 mm in diameter and were acquired at five institutions emulating clinical conditions. One institution also acquired a sphere phantom with multiple source-to-background ratios of 2:1, 5:1, 10:1, 20:1, and 70:1. One observer segmented (contoured) each sphere with GRADIENT and THRESHOLD from 25% to 50% at 5% increments. Subsequently, seven physicians segmented 31 lesions (7-264 mL) from 25 digital thorax phantoms using GRADIENT, THRESHOLD, and MANUAL. Results: For spheres <20 mm in diameter, GRADIENT was the most accurate with a mean absolute % error in diameter of 8.15% (10.2% SD) compared with 49.2% (51.1% SD) for 45% THRESHOLD (p < 0.005). For larger spheres, the methods were statistically equivalent. For varying source-to-background ratios, GRADIENT was the most accurate for spheres >20 mm (p < 0.065) and <20 mm (p < 0.015). For digital thorax phantoms, GRADIENT was the most accurate (p < 0.01), with a mean absolute % error in volume of 10.99% (11.9% SD), followed by 25% THRESHOLD at 17.5% (29.4% SD), and MANUAL at 19.5% (17.2% SD). GRADIENT had the least systematic bias, with a mean % error in volume of -0.05% (16.2% SD) compared with 25% THRESHOLD at -2.1% (34.2% SD) and MANUAL at -16.3% (20.2% SD; p value <0.01). Interobserver variability was reduced using GRADIENT compared with both 25% THRESHOLD and MANUAL (p value <0.01, Levene's test). Conclusion: GRADIENT was the most accurate and consistent technique for target volume contouring. GRADIENT was also the most robust for varying imaging conditions. GRADIENT has the potential to play an important role for tumor delineation in radiation therapy planning and response assessment.
机译:目的:为了评估基于梯度的正电子发射断层扫描(PET)分割方法GRADIENT与手动(MANUAL)和恒定阈值(THRESHOLD)方法的准确性和一致性。方法和材料:使用球形体模和临床上现实的胸部蒙特卡罗PET体模评估轮廓精度。球形体模的直径为10-37 mm,是在五个模仿临床状况的机构中获得的。一家机构还获得了球体模型,其源/背景比率为2:1、5:1、10:1、20:1和70:1。一位观察者使用梯度和阈值以25%到50%的增量(以5%为增量)对每个球体进行了分割(轮廓化)。随后,七名医生使用GRADIENT,THRESHOLD和MANUAL从25个数字胸模中分割了31个病变(7-264 mL)。结果:对于直径小于20 mm的球,GRADIENT是最准确的,其平均绝对绝对误差为8.15%(10.2%SD),而对于45%阈值则为49.2%(51.1%SD)(p <0.005)。对于较大的球体,这些方法在统计上是等效的。对于变化的源-背景比,GRADIENT对于> 20 mm(p <0.065)和<20 mm(p <0.015)的球体最为精确。对于数字胸部体模,GRADIENT是最准确的(p <0.01),音量的平均绝对百分比误差为10.99%(11.9%SD),其后是25%阈值,为17.5%(29.4%SD),而MANUAL为19.5%(标准差为17.2%)。梯度具有最小的系统偏差,体积平均误差百分比为-0.05%(16.2%SD),而阈值误差为25%时为-2.1%(34.2%SD),手动值为-16.3%(20.2%SD; p值) <0.01)。与25%阈值和手动相比,使用GRADIENT减少了观察者之间的差异(p值<0.01,Levene检验)。结论:GRADIENT是用于目标体积轮廓绘制的最准确,最一致的技术。对于不同的成像条件,GRADIENT也是最强大的。梯度在放射治疗计划和反应评估中对肿瘤勾画具有重要作用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号