% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Holzschuh:277318,
author = {J. C. Holzschuh$^*$ and M. Mix and J. Ruf and T. Hölscher
and J. Kotzerke and A. Vrachimis and P. Doolan and H. Ilhan
and I. M. Marinescu$^*$ and S. K. B. Spohn$^*$ and T.
Fechter$^*$ and D. Kuhn$^*$ and P. Bronsert and C. Gratzke
and R. Grosu and S. C. Kamran and P. Heidari and T. S. C. Ng
and A. Könik and A.-L. Grosu$^*$ and C. Zamboglou},
title = {{D}eep {L}earning based {A}utomated {D}elineation of the
{I}ntraprostatic {G}ross {T}umour {V}olume in {PSMA}-{PET}
for {P}atients with {P}rimary {P}rostate {C}ancer.},
journal = {Radiotherapy and oncology},
volume = {188},
issn = {0167-8140},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {DKFZ-2023-01336},
pages = {109774},
year = {2023},
note = {2023 Nov:188:109774},
abstract = {With the increased use of focal radiation dose escalation
for primary prostate cancer (PCa), accurate delineation of
gross tumor volume (GTV) in prostate-specific membrane
antigen PET (PSMA-PET) becomes crucial. Manual approaches
are time-consuming and observer dependent. The purpose of
this study was to create a deep learning model for the
accurate delineation of the intraprostatic GTV in PSMA-PET.A
3D U-Net was trained on 128 different 18F-PSMA-1007 PET
images from three different institutions. Testing was done
on 52 patients including one independent internal cohort
(Freiburg: n=19) and three independent external cohorts
(Dresden: n=14 18F-PSMA-1007, Boston: Massachusetts General
Hospital (MGH): n=9 18F-DCFPyL-PSMA and Dana-Farber Cancer
Institute (DFCI): n=10 68Ga-PSMA-11). Expert contours were
generated in consensus using a validated technique. CNN
predictions were compared to expert contours using Dice
similarity coefficient (DSC). Co-registered whole-mount
histology was used for the internal testing cohort to assess
sensitivity/specificity.Median DSCs were Freiburg: 0.82
(IQR: 0.73-0.88), Dresden: 0.71 (IQR: 0.53-0.75), MGH: 0.80
(IQR: 0.64-0.83) and DFCI: 0.80 (IQR: 0.67-0.84),
respectively. Median sensitivity for CNN and expert contours
were 0.88 (IQR: 0.68-0.97) and 0.85 (IQR: 0.75-0.88)
(p=0.40), respectively. GTV volumes did not differ
significantly (p>0.1 for all comparisons). Median
specificity of 0.83 (IQR: 0.57-0.97) and 0.88 (IQR:
0.69-0.98) were observed for CNN and expert contours
(p=0.014), respectively. CNN prediction took 3.81 seconds on
average per patient.The CNN was trained and tested on
internal and external datasets as well as histopathology
reference, achieving a fast GTV segmentation for three
PSMA-PET tracers with high diagnostic accuracy comparable to
manual experts.},
cin = {FR01},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)FR01-20160331},
pnm = {899 - ohne Topic (POF4-899)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-899},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:37394103},
doi = {10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109774},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/277318},
}