• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一种前瞻性部署的、用于肿瘤姑息性脊柱放射治疗的、启用深度学习的自动化质量保证工具。

A prospectively deployed deep learning-enabled automated quality assurance tool for oncological palliative spine radiation therapy.

作者信息

Kehayias Christopher E, Bontempi Dennis, Quirk Sarah, Friesen Scott, Bredfeldt Jeremy, Kosak Tara, Kearney Meghan, Tishler Roy, Pashtan Itai, Huynh Mai Anh, Aerts Hugo J W L, Mak Raymond H, Guthier Christian V

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIM) Program, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, CARIM & GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.

出版信息

Lancet Digit Health. 2025 Jan;7(1):e13-e22. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00243-7.

DOI:10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00243-7
PMID:39722248
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Palliative spine radiation therapy is prone to treatment at the wrong anatomic level. We developed a fully automated deep learning-based spine-targeting quality assurance system (DL-SpiQA) for detecting treatment at the wrong anatomic level. DL-SpiQA was evaluated based on retrospective testing of spine radiation therapy treatments and prospective clinical deployment.

METHODS

The DL-SpiQA workflow involves auto-segmentation and labelling of all vertebral volumes on CT imaging using TotalSegmentator, an open-source deep learning algorithm based on nnU-Net, calculation of the radiation dose to each vertebra, and flagging and categorisation of potential treatments at the wrong anatomic level with automated email reports sent to involved radiation therapy personnel. We developed the DL-SpiQA tool based on retrospective clinical data from patients treated with palliative spine radiation therapy from sites included in the multicentre hospital network between Feb 12, 2014, and Nov 15, 2022. We used historic cases of patients who had a near-miss (ie, wrong-anatomic-level errors caught before the patient was treated) or had received wrong-anatomic-level treatment to test whether the tool could identify known errors successfully. We then used the tool prospectively over 15 months (April 24, 2023, to July 22, 2024) to evaluate any new spine radiation therapy treatment plan created for a patient, looking for any targeting errors, and dose and volume discrepancies. An email report was circulated with all the radiation therapy personnel; if any errors were found, these were highlighted and each error was defined. The tool was internally validated. All cases flagged by DL-SpiQA for both the retrospective and prospective studies were manually reviewed for dosimetric targeting, variant spine anatomy or spinal anomalies, and artificial intelligence (AI) segmentation errors. DL-SpiQA was further validated based on false positive and negative rates estimated from the retrospective results.

FINDINGS

DL-SpiQA was first tested retrospectively on 513 patients with segmentation of 10 106 vertebrae. The system raised flags for ten dose discrepancies, 49 normal anatomic variants, 49 cases with implants or other anomalies, and 20 segmentation errors (4% false positive rate). DL-SpiQA caught one historic treatment at the wrong anatomic level and three near-misses. DL-SpiQA was then prospectively deployed, reviewing 520 cases and identifying six documentation errors, which triggered detailed review by clinicians, and 43 additional cases, which confirmed clinical knowledge of variant anatomy. In all detected cases (ie, 49 of 520 cases in total), the appropriate personnel were alerted. A false negative rate of 0·03% is estimated based on the 4% AI segmentation error rate and the frequency of reported spine radiation therapy errors.

INTERPRETATION

The low false positive rate, the low false negative rate, and the high accuracy in flagging errors show that DL-SpiQA is an effective, AI-driven, automated quality assurance tool that could be used to identify anatomic spine variants and errors in targeting at the anatomic level. The tool could therefore help improve the safety of spine radiotherapy. Further external validation and tailoring is needed.

FUNDING

None.

摘要

背景

姑息性脊柱放射治疗容易出现治疗解剖层面错误。我们开发了一种基于深度学习的全自动脊柱靶向质量保证系统(DL-SpiQA),用于检测治疗解剖层面错误。基于脊柱放射治疗的回顾性测试和前瞻性临床应用对DL-SpiQA进行了评估。

方法

DL-SpiQA工作流程包括使用TotalSegmentator(一种基于nnU-Net的开源深度学习算法)对CT影像上的所有椎体体积进行自动分割和标记,计算每个椎体的放射剂量,以及通过自动电子邮件报告向相关放射治疗人员标记和分类潜在的治疗解剖层面错误。我们基于2014年2月12日至2022年11月15日多中心医院网络中接受姑息性脊柱放射治疗患者的回顾性临床数据开发了DL-SpiQA工具。我们使用有险些发生错误情况(即患者治疗前发现的解剖层面错误)或接受过解剖层面错误治疗的历史病例来测试该工具能否成功识别已知错误。然后,我们在15个月(2023年4月24日至2024年7月22日)内前瞻性地使用该工具评估为患者制定的任何新的脊柱放射治疗计划,寻找任何靶向错误以及剂量和体积差异。向所有放射治疗人员发送电子邮件报告;如果发现任何错误,将突出显示并定义每个错误。该工具进行了内部验证。对DL-SpiQA在回顾性和前瞻性研究中标记的所有病例进行人工复查,以检查剂量学靶向、脊柱解剖变异或脊柱异常以及人工智能(AI)分割错误。基于回顾性结果估计的假阳性和假阴性率对DL-SpiQA进行了进一步验证。

结果

DL-SpiQA首先对513例患者进行回顾性测试,分割了10106个椎体。该系统标记了10例剂量差异、49例正常解剖变异、49例有植入物或其他异常的病例以及20例分割错误(假阳性率为4%)。DL-SpiQA发现了1例历史上解剖层面错误的治疗病例和3例险些发生错误的情况。然后DL-SpiQA进行前瞻性应用,审查了520例病例,识别出6例文档错误,引发了临床医生的详细审查,以及43例其他病例,这些病例证实了对变异解剖的临床认识。在所有检测到的病例(即520例中的49例)中,向适当人员发出了警报。根据4%的AI分割错误率和报告的脊柱放射治疗错误频率,估计假阴性率为0.03%。

解读

低假阳性率、低假阴性率以及标记错误的高准确性表明,DL-SpiQA是一种有效的、由人工智能驱动的自动化质量保证工具,可用于识别脊柱解剖变异和解剖层面的靶向错误。因此,该工具有助于提高脊柱放疗的安全性。需要进一步的外部验证和调整。

资金来源

无。

相似文献

1
A prospectively deployed deep learning-enabled automated quality assurance tool for oncological palliative spine radiation therapy.一种前瞻性部署的、用于肿瘤姑息性脊柱放射治疗的、启用深度学习的自动化质量保证工具。
Lancet Digit Health. 2025 Jan;7(1):e13-e22. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00243-7.
2
An Automated Treatment Planning Framework for Spinal Radiation Therapy and Vertebral-Level Second Check.脊柱放射治疗和椎体水平二次检查的自动治疗计划框架
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2022 Nov 1;114(3):516-528. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.06.083. Epub 2022 Jul 3.
3
Prospective deployment of an automated implementation solution for artificial intelligence translation to clinical radiation oncology.人工智能翻译自动化实施解决方案在临床放射肿瘤学中的前瞻性部署。
Front Oncol. 2024 Jan 4;13:1305511. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1305511. eCollection 2023.
4
Results of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Image Review System to Detect Patient Misalignment Errors in a Multi-institutional Database of Cone Beam Computed Tomography-Guided Radiation Therapy.基于人工智能的图像审查系统在锥形束计算机断层扫描引导放射治疗多机构数据库中检测患者对位错误的结果。
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2024 Sep 1;120(1):243-252. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.02.065. Epub 2024 Mar 12.
5
Object recognition in medical images via anatomy-guided deep learning.通过解剖学引导的深度学习实现医学图像中的目标识别。
Med Image Anal. 2022 Oct;81:102527. doi: 10.1016/j.media.2022.102527. Epub 2022 Jun 25.
6
A comparative study on automatic treatment planning for online adaptive proton therapy of esophageal cancer: which combination of deformable registration and deep learning planning tools performs the best?食管癌在线自适应质子治疗的自动计划比较研究:哪种形变配准和深度学习计划工具的组合效果最好?
Phys Med Biol. 2024 Oct 10;69(20). doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad80f6.
7
Contour subregion error detection methodology using deep learning auto-segmentation.基于深度学习自动分割的轮廓子区域误差检测方法。
Med Phys. 2023 Nov;50(11):6673-6683. doi: 10.1002/mp.16768. Epub 2023 Oct 4.
8
Contouring quality assurance methodology based on multiple geometric features against deep learning auto-segmentation.基于多种几何特征的深度学习自动分割轮廓质量保证方法。
Med Phys. 2023 May;50(5):2715-2732. doi: 10.1002/mp.16299. Epub 2023 Feb 25.
9
Evaluation of a multiview architecture for automatic vertebral labeling of palliative radiotherapy simulation CT images.评估一种多视图架构,用于自动标记姑息性放疗模拟 CT 图像的椎体。
Med Phys. 2020 Nov;47(11):5592-5608. doi: 10.1002/mp.14415. Epub 2020 Sep 15.
10
Evaluating the clinical acceptability of deep learning contours of prostate and organs-at-risk in an automated prostate treatment planning process.评估自动前列腺治疗计划流程中深度学习前列腺和危及器官轮廓的临床可接受性。
Med Phys. 2022 Apr;49(4):2570-2581. doi: 10.1002/mp.15525. Epub 2022 Feb 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Artificial Intelligence Models for Predicting Outcomes in Spinal Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.预测脊柱转移瘤预后的人工智能模型:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 20;14(16):5885. doi: 10.3390/jcm14165885.