The purpose of this research is to develop effective data integrity models for contoured anatomy in a radiotherapy workflow for both real-time and retrospective analysis. Within this study, two classes of contour integrity models were developed: data driven models and contiguousness models. The data driven models aim to highlight contours which deviate from a gross set of contours from similar disease sites and encompass the following regions of interest (ROI): bladder, femoral heads, spinal cord, and rectum. The contiguousness models, which individually analyze the geometry of contours to detect possible errors, are applied across many different ROI's and are divided into two metrics: Extent and Region Growing over volume. After analysis, we found that 70% of detected bladder contours were verified as suspicious. The spinal cord and rectum models verified that 73% and 80% of contours were suspicious respectively. The contiguousness models were the most accurate models and the Region Growing model was the most accurate submodel. 100% of the detected noncontiguous contours were verified as suspicious, but in the cases of spinal cord, femoral heads, bladder, and rectum, the Region Growing model detected additional two to five suspicious contours that the Extent model failed to detect. When conducting a blind review to detect false negatives, it was found that all the data driven models failed to detect all suspicious contours. The Region Growing contiguousness model produced zero false negatives in all regions of interest other than prostate. With regards to runtime, the contiguousness via extent model took an average of 0.2 s per contour. On the other hand, the region growing method had a longer runtime which was dependent on the number of voxels in the contour. Both contiguousness models have potential for real-time use in clinical radiotherapy while the data driven models are better suited for retrospective use.
Keywords: clinical workflow; contiguous; data integrity system; normal tissue contour; radiotherapy.
© 2018 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.