Robins Marthony, Solomon Justin, Hoye Jocelyn, Smith Taylor, Zheng Yuese, Ebner Lukas, Choudhury Kingshuk Roy, Samei Ehsan
Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Duke University, Medical Physics Graduate Program, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2018 Jul;5(3):035504. doi: 10.1117/1.JMI.5.3.035504. Epub 2018 Sep 24.
Using hybrid datasets consisting of patient-derived computed tomography (CT) images with digitally inserted computational tumors, we establish volumetric interchangeability between real and computational lung tumors in CT. Pathologically-confirmed malignancies from 30 thoracic patient cases from the RIDER database were modeled. Tumors were either isolated or attached to lung structures. Patient images were acquired on one of two CT scanner models (Lightspeed 16 or VCT; GE Healthcare) using standard chest protocol. Real tumors were segmented and used to inform the size and shape of simulated tumors. Simulated tumors developed in Duke Lesion Tool (Duke University) were inserted using a validated image-domain insertion program. Four readers performed volume measurements using three commercial segmentation tools. We compared the volume estimation performance of segmentation tools between real tumors in actual patient CT images and corresponding simulated tumors virtually inserted into the same patient images (i.e., hybrid datasets). Comparisons involved (1) direct assessment of measured volumes and the standard deviation between simulated and real tumors across readers and tools, respectively, (2) multivariate analysis, involving segmentation tools, readers, tumor shape, and attachment, and (3) effect of local tumor environment on volume measurement. Volume comparison showed consistent trends (9% volumetric difference) between real and simulated tumors across all segmentation tools, readers, shapes, and attachments. Across all cases, readers, and segmentation tools, an intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.99 indicates that simulated tumors correlated strongly with real tumors ( ). In addition, the impact of the local tumor environment on tumor volume measurement was found to have a segmentation tool-related influence. Strong agreement between simulated tumors modeled in this study compared to their real counterparts suggests a high degree of similarity. This indicates that, volumetrically, simulated tumors embedded into patient CT data can serve as reasonable surrogates to real patient data.
我们使用由患者来源的计算机断层扫描(CT)图像与数字插入的计算肿瘤组成的混合数据集,建立了CT中真实和计算性肺肿瘤之间的体积互换性。对来自RIDER数据库的30例胸部患者病例的病理确诊恶性肿瘤进行了建模。肿瘤要么是孤立的,要么附着于肺部结构。使用标准胸部协议在两种CT扫描仪型号(Lightspeed 16或VCT;GE医疗)之一上采集患者图像。对真实肿瘤进行分割,并用于确定模拟肿瘤的大小和形状。使用经过验证的图像域插入程序插入在杜克病变工具(杜克大学)中生成的模拟肿瘤。四名读者使用三种商业分割工具进行体积测量。我们比较了实际患者CT图像中的真实肿瘤与虚拟插入同一患者图像(即混合数据集)中的相应模拟肿瘤之间分割工具的体积估计性能。比较包括:(1)分别直接评估读者和工具之间模拟肿瘤与真实肿瘤之间测量体积和标准差;(2)多变量分析,涉及分割工具、读者、肿瘤形状和附着情况;(3)局部肿瘤环境对体积测量的影响。体积比较显示,在所有分割工具、读者、形状和附着情况下,真实肿瘤与模拟肿瘤之间存在一致趋势(体积差异9%)。在所有病例、读者和分割工具中,组内相关系数=0.99表明模拟肿瘤与真实肿瘤高度相关( )。此外,发现局部肿瘤环境对肿瘤体积测量的影响具有与分割工具相关的影响。本研究中建模的模拟肿瘤与其真实对应物之间的高度一致性表明具有高度相似性。这表明,在体积上,嵌入患者CT数据中的模拟肿瘤可作为真实患者数据的合理替代物。