van den Berg Cornelis A T, Meliadò Ettore F
Department of Radiotherapy, Division of Imaging & Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Computational Imaging Group for MR diagnostics & therapy, Center for Image Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Computational Imaging Group for MR diagnostics & therapy, Center for Image Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Semin Radiat Oncol. 2022 Oct;32(4):304-318. doi: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2022.06.001.
In the last 5 years, deep learning applications for radiotherapy have undergone great development. An advantage of radiotherapy over radiological applications is that data in radiotherapy are well structured, standardized, and annotated. Furthermore, there is much to be gained in automating the current laborious workflows in radiotherapy. After the initial peak in the belief in deep learning, researchers have also identified fundamental weaknesses of deep learning. The basic assumption in deep learning is that the training and test data originate from the same data generating process. This is not always clear-cut in clinical practice, eg, data acquired with 2 different scanners of different vendors might not originate from the same data generating process. Furthermore, it is important to realize residual uncertainties remain even if test data arise from the same data generating process as the training data. As deep learning applications are being introduced in clinical radiotherapy workflows, a deep learning model must express to a user when a prediction exceeds a certain uncertainty threshold. The literature on uncertainty assessment for deep learning applications in radiotherapy is still in its infancy; however, quite a body of literature exists on the validity and uncertainty of deep learning models for computer vision applications. This paper tries to explain these general concepts to the radiotherapy community. Concepts of epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties and techniques to model them in deep learning are described in detail. It is discussed how they can be applied to maximize confidence in automated deep learning-driven workflows. Their usage is demonstrated in 3 examples from radiotherapy literature on deep learning applications, ie, dose prediction, synthetic CT generation, and contouring. In the final part, some of the key elements to ensure confidence and automatic alerting that are still missing are discussed. State-of-the-art automatic solutions for checking within-distribution vs out-of-distribution test samples are discussed. However, these methodologies are still immature, and strict QA protocols and close human supervision will still be needed. Nevertheless, deep learning models offer already much value for radiotherapy.
在过去5年中,深度学习在放射治疗中的应用取得了巨大发展。放射治疗相对于放射学应用的一个优势在于,放射治疗中的数据结构良好、标准化且带有注释。此外,实现放射治疗中当前繁琐工作流程的自动化还有很多益处。在对深度学习的信心达到最初的高峰之后,研究人员也发现了深度学习的一些基本弱点。深度学习的基本假设是训练数据和测试数据源自相同的数据生成过程。在临床实践中,情况并非总是如此明确,例如,使用不同供应商的两台不同扫描仪获取的数据可能并非源自相同的数据生成过程。此外,重要的是要认识到,即使测试数据与训练数据源自相同的数据生成过程,仍然存在残余的不确定性。随着深度学习应用被引入临床放射治疗工作流程中,如果预测超过某个不确定性阈值,深度学习模型必须向用户表明这一点。关于深度学习在放射治疗应用中的不确定性评估的文献仍处于起步阶段;然而,关于深度学习模型在计算机视觉应用中的有效性和不确定性,已经有相当多的文献。本文试图向放射治疗领域的人士解释这些一般概念。详细描述了认知不确定性和偶然不确定性的概念以及在深度学习中对它们进行建模的技术。讨论了如何应用这些概念来最大限度地提高对自动化深度学习驱动工作流程的信心。通过放射治疗文献中关于深度学习应用的3个例子,即剂量预测、合成CT生成和轮廓勾画,展示了它们的用法。在最后一部分,讨论了确保信心和自动警报的一些关键要素,这些要素目前仍然缺失。还讨论了用于检查分布内与分布外测试样本的最新自动解决方案。然而,这些方法仍然不成熟,仍然需要严格的质量保证协议和密切的人工监督。尽管如此,深度学习模型已经为放射治疗提供了很大的价值。