Dataset Information

Deep Learning: A Review for the Radiation Oncologist.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Deep Learning (DL) is a machine learning technique that uses deep neural networks to create a model. The application areas of deep learning in radiation oncology include image segmentation and detection, image phenotyping, and radiomic signature discovery, clinical outcome prediction, image dose quantification, dose-response modeling, radiation adaptation, and image generation. In this review, we explain the methods used in DL and perform a literature review using the Medline database to identify studies using deep learning in radiation oncology. The search was conducted in April 2018, and identified studies published between 1997 and 2018, strongly skewed toward 2015 and later. Methods: A literature review was performed using PubMed/Medline in order to identify important recent publications to be synthesized into a review of the current status of Deep Learning in radiation oncology, directed at a clinically-oriented reader. The search strategy included the search terms "radiotherapy" and "deep learning." In addition, reference lists of selected articles were hand searched for further potential hits of relevance to this review. The search was conducted in April 2018, and identified studies published between 1997 and 2018, strongly skewed toward 2015 and later. Results: Studies using DL for image segmentation were identified in Brain (n = 2), Head and Neck (n = 3), Lung (n = 6), Abdominal (n = 2), and Pelvic (n = 6) cancers. Use of Deep Learning has also been reported for outcome prediction, such as toxicity modeling (n = 3), treatment response and survival (n = 2), or treatment planning (n = 5). Conclusion: Over the past few years, there has been a significant number of studies assessing the performance of DL techniques in radiation oncology. They demonstrate how DL-based systems can aid clinicians in their daily work, be it by reducing the time required for or the variability in segmentation, or by helping to predict treatment outcomes and toxicities. It still remains to be seen when these techniques will be employed in routine clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Boldrini L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6779810 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Deep Learning: A Review for the Radiation Oncologist.

Boldrini Luca L Bibault Jean-Emmanuel JE Masciocchi Carlotta C Shen Yanting Y Bittner Martin-Immanuel MI

Frontiers in oncology 20191001

<b>Introduction:</b> Deep Learning (DL) is a machine learning technique that uses deep neural networks to create a model. The application areas of deep learning in radiation oncology include image segmentation and detection, image phenotyping, and radiomic signature discovery, clinical outcome prediction, image dose quantification, dose-response modeling, radiation adaptation, and image generation. In this review, we explain the methods used in DL and perform a literature review using the Medlin ...[more]

PMID: 31632910

Similar Datasets

Project description:To investigate deep reinforcement learning (DRL) based on historical treatment plans for developing automated radiation adaptation protocols for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients that aim to maximize tumor local control at reduced rates of radiation pneumonitis grade 2 (RP2).In a retrospective population of 114 NSCLC patients who received radiotherapy, a three-component neural networks framework was developed for deep reinforcement learning (DRL) of dose fractionation adaptation. Large-scale patient characteristics included clinical, genetic, and imaging radiomics features in addition to tumor and lung dosimetric variables. First, a generative adversarial network (GAN) was employed to learn patient population characteristics necessary for DRL training from a relatively limited sample size. Second, a radiotherapy artificial environment (RAE) was reconstructed by a deep neural network (DNN) utilizing both original and synthetic data (by GAN) to estimate the transition probabilities for adaptation of personalized radiotherapy patients' treatment courses. Third, a deep Q-network (DQN) was applied to the RAE for choosing the optimal dose in a response-adapted treatment setting. This multicomponent reinforcement learning approach was benchmarked against real clinical decisions that were applied in an adaptive dose escalation clinical protocol. In which, 34 patients were treated based on avid PET signal in the tumor and constrained by a 17.2% normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) limit for RP2. The uncomplicated cure probability (P+) was used as a baseline reward function in the DRL.Taking our adaptive dose escalation protocol as a blueprint for the proposed DRL (GAN + RAE + DQN) architecture, we obtained an automated dose adaptation estimate for use at ?2/3 of the way into the radiotherapy treatment course. By letting the DQN component freely control the estimated adaptive dose per fraction (ranging from 1-5 Gy), the DRL automatically favored dose escalation/de-escalation between 1.5 and 3.8 Gy, a range similar to that used in the clinical protocol. The same DQN yielded two patterns of dose escalation for the 34 test patients, but with different reward variants. First, using the baseline P+ reward function, individual adaptive fraction doses of the DQN had similar tendencies to the clinical data with an RMSE = 0.76 Gy; but adaptations suggested by the DQN were generally lower in magnitude (less aggressive). Second, by adjusting the P+ reward function with higher emphasis on mitigating local failure, better matching of doses between the DQN and the clinical protocol was achieved with an RMSE = 0.5 Gy. Moreover, the decisions selected by the DQN seemed to have better concordance with patients eventual outcomes. In comparison, the traditional temporal difference (TD) algorithm for reinforcement learning yielded an RMSE = 3.3 Gy due to numerical instabilities and lack of sufficient learning.We demonstrated that automated dose adaptation by DRL is a feasible and a promising approach for achieving similar results to those chosen by clinicians. The process may require customization of the reward function if individual cases were to be considered. However, development of this framework into a fully credible autonomous system for clinical decision support would require further validation on larger multi-institutional datasets.

Project description:PurposeTelemedicine was rapidly implemented for initial consultations and radiation treatment planning in the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In this study, we explore utilization of and physician perspectives on this approach in an attempt to identify patient populations that may benefit most from virtual care.Methods and materialsThis is a mixed-methods study with a convergent design. Approximately 6 to 8 weeks after implementation of telemedicine, all radiation oncologists in a single academic radiation oncology department were invited to participate in either semistructured interviews with embedded survey questions or a concurrently administered survey only. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to identify common themes, and quantitative data was assessed using descriptive statistics and univariable analyses.ResultsAt the apex of the pandemic, 92% of radiation oncology visits were conducted via telemedicine. In total, 51 of 61 radiation oncologists participated in the study (response rate 84%). Most (71%) reported no difference in ability to treat cancer appropriately via telemedicine, which was more common among specialized physicians (P = .01) but not those with higher visit volume or years of experience. Over half (55%) perceived no difference or even improvement in overall visit quality with telemedicine. Virtual visits were deemed acceptable for a median of 70% to 96% of patients, which varied by disease site. Need for physical examination, and availability of an acceptable proxy, factored into telemedicine acceptability. Most (88%) found telemedicine better than expected, but opinions were split on how telemedicine would affect physician burnout. Almost all (96%) foresaw a role for telemedicine beyond the pandemic and would opt for a median of 50% (interquartile range 20%-66%) of visits conducted via telemedicine.ConclusionsAmong radiation oncologists in an academic setting, telemedicine was perceived to be highly appropriate and acceptable for most patients. Future studies should focus on identifying the 5% to 30% of patients whose care may be optimized with in-person visits, and if there is alignment with patient preferences.

Project description:In this paper, we first describe the basics of the field of cancer diagnosis, which includes steps of cancer diagnosis followed by the typical classification methods used by doctors, providing a historical idea of cancer classification techniques to the readers. These methods include Asymmetry, Border, Color and Diameter (ABCD) method, seven-point detection method, Menzies method, and pattern analysis. They are used regularly by doctors for cancer diagnosis, although they are not considered very efficient for obtaining better performance. Moreover, considering all types of audience, the basic evaluation criteria are also discussed. The criteria include the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve), Area under the ROC curve (AUC), F1 score, accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, precision, dice-coefficient, average accuracy, and Jaccard index. Previously used methods are considered inefficient, asking for better and smarter methods for cancer diagnosis. Artificial intelligence and cancer diagnosis are gaining attention as a way to define better diagnostic tools. In particular, deep neural networks can be successfully used for intelligent image analysis. The basic framework of how this machine learning works on medical imaging is provided in this study, i.e., pre-processing, image segmentation and post-processing. The second part of this manuscript describes the different deep learning techniques, such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), generative adversarial models (GANs), deep autoencoders (DANs), restricted Boltzmann's machine (RBM), stacked autoencoders (SAE), convolutional autoencoders (CAE), recurrent neural networks (RNNs), long short-term memory (LTSM), multi-scale convolutional neural network (M-CNN), multi-instance learning convolutional neural network (MIL-CNN). For each technique, we provide Python codes, to allow interested readers to experiment with the cited algorithms on their own diagnostic problems. The third part of this manuscript compiles the successfully applied deep learning models for different types of cancers. Considering the length of the manuscript, we restrict ourselves to the discussion of breast cancer, lung cancer, brain cancer, and skin cancer. The purpose of this bibliographic review is to provide researchers opting to work in implementing deep learning and artificial neural networks for cancer diagnosis a knowledge from scratch of the state-of-the-art achievements.

Dataset Information

Deep Learning: A Review for the Radiation Oncologist.

Publications

Deep Learning: A Review for the Radiation Oncologist.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets