Incorporating human and learned domain knowledge into training deep neural networks: A differentiable dose-volume histogram and adversarial inspired framework for generating Pareto optimal dose distributions in radiation therapy.

adversarial networks deep learning domain knowledge dose volume histogram intensity modulated radiation therapy pareto optimality

Journal

Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Historique:
received: 22 08 2019
revised: 05 12 2019
accepted: 05 12 2019
pubmed: 11 12 2019
medline: 29 12 2020
entrez: 11 12 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

We propose a novel domain-specific loss, which is a differentiable loss function based on the dose-volume histogram (DVH), and combine it with an adversarial loss for the training of deep neural networks. In this study, we trained a neural network for generating Pareto optimal dose distributions, and evaluate the effects of the domain-specific loss on the model performance. In this study, three loss functions - mean squared error (MSE) loss, DVH loss, and adversarial (ADV) loss - were used to train and compare four instances of the neural network model: (a) MSE, (b) MSE + ADV, (c) MSE + DVH, and (d) MSE + DVH+ADV. The data for 70 prostate patients, including the planning target volume (PTV), and the organs at risk (OAR) were acquired as 96 × 96 × 24 dimension arrays at 5 mm Training for 100 000 iterations took 1.5 days (MSE), 3.5 days (MSE+ADV), 2.3 days (MSE+DVH), and 3.8 days (MSE+DVH+ADV). After training, the prediction time of each model is 0.052 s. Quantitatively, the MSE+DVH+ADV model had the lowest prediction error of 0.038 (conformation), 0.026 (homogeneity), 0.298 (R50), 1.65% (D95), 2.14% (D98), and 2.43% (D99). The MSE model had the worst prediction error of 0.134 (conformation), 0.041 (homogeneity), 0.520 (R50), 3.91% (D95), 4.33% (D98), and 4.60% (D99). For both the mean dose PTV error and the max dose PTV, Body, Bladder and rectum error, the MSE+DVH+ADV outperformed all other models. Regardless of model, all predictions have an average mean and max dose error <2.8% and 4.2%, respectively. The MSE+DVH+ADV model performed the best in these categories, illustrating the importance of both human and learned domain knowledge. Expert human domain-specific knowledge can be the largest driver in the performance improvement, and adversarial learning can be used to further capture nuanced attributes in the data. The real-time prediction capabilities allow for a physician to quickly navigate the tradeoff space for a patient, and produce a dose distribution as a tangible endpoint for the dosimetrist to use for planning. This is expected to considerably reduce the treatment planning time, allowing for clinicians to focus their efforts on the difficult and demanding cases.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31821577
doi: 10.1002/mp.13955
pmc: PMC7819274
mid: NIHMS1661461
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

837-849

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01 CA237269
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : R01CA237269
Pays : United States
Organisme : Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas
ID : IIRA RP150485

Informations de copyright

© 2019 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Références

Med Phys. 2015 Apr;42(4):1858-70
pubmed: 25832076
Med Phys. 2015 Feb;42(2):908
pubmed: 25652503
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Nov 15;72(4):996-1001
pubmed: 18455326
Med Phys. 2016 Jan;43(1):378
pubmed: 26745931
Phys Med Biol. 2008 Feb 21;53(4):985-98
pubmed: 18263953
Med Phys. 2003 Aug;30(8):2065-71
pubmed: 12945972
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Feb 1;37(3):731-6
pubmed: 9112473
Med Phys. 2012 Nov;39(11):6868-78
pubmed: 23127079
Cancer Radiother. 2011 Oct;15(6-7):555-9
pubmed: 21802333
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Aug;112(2):221-6
pubmed: 25108808
Sci Rep. 2019 Jan 31;9(1):1076
pubmed: 30705354
Med Phys. 2017 Nov;44(11):5596-5609
pubmed: 28834556
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Dec 04;63(23):235022
pubmed: 30511663
Radiother Oncol. 1988 Jun;12(2):129-40
pubmed: 3406458
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 15;76(4):1177-84
pubmed: 19560880
Med Phys. 2008 Jan;35(1):310-7
pubmed: 18293586
Phys Med Biol. 2009 Nov 7;54(21):6725-38
pubmed: 19841516
Phys Med Biol. 2017 May 7;62(9):3599-3618
pubmed: 28379849
Phys Med Biol. 2003 Apr 21;48(8):1075-89
pubmed: 12741503
Med Phys. 2014 Jan;41(1):011905
pubmed: 24387513
Phys Med Biol. 1995 Sep;40(9):1435-49
pubmed: 8532757
Med Phys. 2016 Oct;43(10):5667
pubmed: 27782726
Med Phys. 2016 Jul;43(7):4263
pubmed: 27370141
Med Phys. 2009 Mar;36(3):734-40
pubmed: 19378734
Med Phys. 2012 Dec;39(12):7446-61
pubmed: 23231294
Phys Med Biol. 1989 Oct;34(10):1349-70
pubmed: 2682694
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Mar 1;64(3):962-7
pubmed: 16458781
Med Phys. 2019 Aug;46(8):3679-3691
pubmed: 31102554
Phys Med Biol. 2003 May 21;48(10):1333-44
pubmed: 12812450
Med Phys. 2019 Jan;46(1):370-381
pubmed: 30383300
Med Phys. 2011 Feb;38(2):719-26
pubmed: 21452709
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Oct 1;81(2):545-51
pubmed: 21277097
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Sep 1;87(1):176-81
pubmed: 23623460
Med Phys. 1998 Aug;25(8):1424-34
pubmed: 9725129
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Feb 08;63(4):04NT01
pubmed: 29328050
Med Phys. 2014 Jun;41(6):061711
pubmed: 24877806
Med Phys. 2020 Feb;47(2):297-306
pubmed: 31675444
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994 Feb 1;28(3):723-30
pubmed: 8113118
Med Phys. 2013 Dec;40(12):121704
pubmed: 24320490
Med Phys. 2018 Jul;45(7):2875-2883
pubmed: 29679492
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Mar 15;79(4):1241-7
pubmed: 20800382
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Dec 1;45(5):1315-24
pubmed: 10613328
Radiat Oncol. 2017 Apr 24;12(1):70
pubmed: 28438215
Phys Med Biol. 1990 Oct;35(10):1423-34
pubmed: 2243845
Med Phys. 2006 Sep;33(9):3399-407
pubmed: 17022236
Med Phys. 2013 Jan;40(1):011709
pubmed: 23298079
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Feb 15;63(4):045015
pubmed: 29351088
Med Phys. 2013 Feb;40(2):021714
pubmed: 23387737
Phys Med Biol. 2019 Mar 18;64(6):065020
pubmed: 30703760
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Dec;125(3):392-397
pubmed: 29162279
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):e83-90
pubmed: 21300448
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2009 Jun;21(5):401-7
pubmed: 19268554
Med Phys. 2009 Dec;36(12):5497-505
pubmed: 20095262

Auteurs

Dan Nguyen (D)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Rafe McBeth (R)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Azar Sadeghnejad Barkousaraie (A)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Gyanendra Bohara (G)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Chenyang Shen (C)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Xun Jia (X)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Steve Jiang (S)

Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH