Consistency in contouring of organs at risk by artificial intelligence vs oncologists in head and neck cancer patients.

Peter Sandegaard Skyt, Christian Rønn Hansen, Jeppe Friborg, Cai Grau, Christian Maare, Maria Andersen, Mohammad Farhadi, Jesper Grau Eriksen, Ruta Zukauskaite, Jørgen Johansen, Ulrik Vindelev Elstrøm, Jens Overgaard, Patrik Sibolt, Martin Skovmos Nielsen, Eva Samsøe, Anne Ivalu Sander Holm, Bob Smulders, Carsten Brink, Nis Sarup, Kenneth Jensen, Ebbe Laugaard Lorenzen, Camilla Panduro Nielsen

Journal: Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) 2023;62(11):1418-1425

PMID: 37703300

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the Danish Head and Neck Cancer Group (DAHANCA) 35 trial, patients are selected for proton treatment based on simulated reductions of Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) for proton compared to photon treatment at the referring departments. After inclusion in the trial, immobilization, scanning, contouring and planning are repeated at the national proton centre. The new contours could result in reduced expected NTCP gain of the proton plan, resulting in a loss of validity in the selection process. The present study evaluates if contour consistency can be improved by having access to AI (Artificial Intelligence) based contours.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 63 patients in the DAHANCA 35 pilot trial had a CT from the local DAHANCA centre and one from the proton centre. A nationally validated convolutional neural network, based on nnU-Net, was used to contour OARs on both scans for each patient. Using deformable image registration, local AI and oncologist contours were transferred to the proton centre scans for comparison. Consistency was calculated with the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and Mean Surface Distance (MSD), comparing contours from AI to AI and oncologist to oncologist, respectively. Two NTCP models were applied to calculate NTCP for xerostomia and dysphagia.

RESULTS

The AI contours showed significantly better consistency than the contours by oncologists. The median and interquartile range of DSC was 0.85 [0.78 - 0.90] and 0.68 [0.51 - 0.80] for AI and oncologist contours, respectively. The median and interquartile range of MSD was 0.9 mm [0.7 - 1.1] mm and 1.9 mm [1.5 - 2.6] mm for AI and oncologist contours, respectively. There was no significant difference in NTCP.

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed that OAR contours made by the AI algorithm were more consistent than those made by oncologists. No significant impact on the NTCP calculations could be discerned.

Address: Laboratory of Radiation Physics, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.; Danish Centre of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.; Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.; Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark.; Department of Oncology, Zealand University Hospital, Naestved, Denmark.; Department of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.; Department of Oncology, University Hospital Herlev, Herlev, Denmark.; Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.; Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.

Link outs

Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.