Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Distance deviation measure of contouring variability Cover

Distance deviation measure of contouring variability

Radiology and Oncology
Volume 47 (2013): Issue 1 (March 2013)
By: Peter Rogel,  Robert Hudej and  Primoz Petric  
Open Access
|Feb 2013

References

  1. 1. Ayata HB, Güden M, Cemile Ceylan C. Comparison of dose distributions and organs at risk (OAR) doses in conventional tangential technique (CTT) and IMRT plans with different numbers of beam in left-sided breast cancer. RepPract Oncol Radiother 2011; 16: 95-102.10.1016/j.rpor.2011.02.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. 2. Petric P, Hudej R, Rogelj P, Blas M, Segedin B, Logar HBZ, et al. Comparison of 3D MRI with high sampling efficiency and 2D multiplanar MRI for contouring in cervix cancer brachytherapy. Radiol Oncol 2012; 46: 242-51.10.2478/v10019-012-0023-1
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. 3. Matthiesen C, Ramgopol R, Seavey J, Ahmad S, Herman T. Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for the treatment of unicentric Castlemans disease: a case report and review of the use of radiotherapy in the literature. Radiol Oncol 2012; 46: 265-70.10.2478/v10019-012-0008-0
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. 4. Jameson MG, Holloway LC, Vial PJ, Vinod SK, Metcalfe PE. A review of methods of analysis in contouring studies for radiation oncology. J Med ImagingRadiat Oncol 2010; 54: 401-10.10.1111/j.1754-9485.2010.02192.x
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. 5. Kouwenhoven E, Giezen M, Struikmans H. Measuring the similarity of target volume delineations independent of the number of observers. Phys MedBiol 2009; 54: 2863-73.10.1088/0031-9155/54/9/018
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. 6. Weltens C, Menten J, Feron M, Bellon E, Demaerel P, Maes F, et al. Interobserver variations in gross tumor volume delineation of brain tumors on computed tomography and impact of magnetic resonance imaging. Radiother Oncol 2001; 60: 49-59.10.1016/S0167-8140(01)00371-1
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. 7. Weiss E, Richter S, Krauss T, Metzelthin SI, Hille A, Pradier O, et al. Conformal radiotherapy planning of cervix carcinoma: differences in the delineation of the clinical target volume. A comparison between gynaecologic and radiation oncologists. Radiother Oncol 2003; 67: 87-95.10.1016/S0167-8140(02)00373-0
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. 8. Batumalai V, Koh ES, Delaney GP, Holloway LC, Jameson MG, Papadatos G, et al. Interobserver variability in clinical target volume delineation in tangential breast irradiation: a comparison between radiation oncologists and radiation therapists. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2011; 23: 108-13.10.1016/j.clon.2010.10.00421093228
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. 9. Altorjai G, Fotina I, Lütgendorf-Caucig C, Stock M, Pötter R, Georg D, et al. Cone-beam CT-based delineation of stereotactic lung targets: the influence of image modality and target size on interobserver variability. Int J RadiatOncol Biol Phys 2012; 82: e265-72.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.03.04221620581
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. 10. Choi HJ, Kim YS, Lee SH, Lee YS, Park G, Jung JH, et al. Inter- and intra-observer variability in contouring of the prostate gland on planning computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography. Acta Oncol 2011; 50: 539-46.10.3109/0284186X.2011.56291621391773
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. 11. Remeijer P, Rasch C, Lebesque JV, van Herk M. A general methodology for three-dimensional analysis of variation in target volume delineation. MedPhys 1999; 26: 931-40.10.1118/1.598485
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. 12. Deurloo KE, Steenbakkers RJ, Zijp LJ, de Bois JA, Nowak PJ, Rasch CR, et al. Quantification of shape variation of prostate and seminal, vesicles during external beam radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61: 228-38.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.09.023
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. 13. Steenbakkers RJ, Duppen JC, Fitton I, Deurloo KE, Zijp LJ, Comans EF, et al. Reduction of observer variation using matched CT-PET for lung cancer delineation: a three-dimensional analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 64: 435-48.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.06.034
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. 14. Chalana V, Kim Y. A methodology for evaluation of boundary detection algorithms on medical images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16: 642-52.10.1109/42.640755
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. 15. Jena R, Kirkby NF, Burton KE, Hoole AC, Tan LT, Burnet NG. A novel algorithm for the morphometric assessment of radiotherapy treatment planning volumes. Br J Radiol 2010; 83: 44-51.10.1259/bjr/27674581
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. 16. Heimann T, van Ginneken B, Styner MA, Arzhaeva Y, Aurich V, Bauer C, et al. Comparison and evaluation of methods for liver segmentation from CT datasets. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2009; 28: 1251-65.10.1109/TMI.2009.2013851
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. 17. van der Put RW, Raaymakers BW, Kerkhof EM, van Vulpen M, Lagendijk JJ. A novel method for comparing 3D target volume delineations in radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2008; 53: 2149-59.10.1088/0031-9155/53/8/010
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. 18. Rao M, Stough J, Chi YY, Muller K, Tracton G, Pizer SM, et al. Comparison of human and automatic segmentations of kidneys from CT images. Int JRadiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61: 954-60.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.11.014
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. 19. Rosenfeld A, Pfaltz JL. Distance functions on digital pictures. PatternRecognition 1968; 1: 33-61.10.1016/0031-3203(68)90013-7
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. 20. Ye Q-Z. The signed Euclidean distance transform and its applications. PatternRecognition 1988; 1: 495-9. Rome, Italy: 9th International Conference on. Nov. 1988.
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. 21. Maurer CR Jr, Rensheng QI, Raghavan V. A linear time algorithm for computing exact Euclidean distance transforms of binary images in arbitrary dimensions. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactionson 2003; 25: 265-70.10.1109/TPAMI.2003.1177156
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. 22. Xu D, Li H. Euclidean distance transform of digital images in arbitrary dimensions. In: Zhuang Y, Yang S.-Q, Rui Y, He Q, editors. Advances in multimediainformation processing - PCM 2006. Vol. 4261. Lecture notes in computer science. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 2006. pp. 72-9.10.1007/11922162_9
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. 23. Breu H, Gil J, Kirkpatrick D, Werman M. Linear time Euclidean distance transform algorithms. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEETransactions on1995; 17: 529-33.10.1109/34.391389
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. 24. Wang L, Giesen J, McDonnell KT, Zolliker P, Mueller K. Color design for illustrative visualization. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactionson 2008; 14: 1739-54.10.1109/TVCG.2008.118
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. 25. Petric P, Dimopoulos J, Kirisits C, Berger D, Hudej R, Pötter R. Inter- and intraobserver variation in HR-CTV contouring: Inter-comparison of transverse and paratransverse image orientation in 3D-MRI assisted cervix cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol 2008; 89: 164-71.10.1016/j.radonc.2008.07.030
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. 26. Hurkmans CW, Borger JH, Pieters BR, Russell NS, Jansen EP, Mijnheer BJ. Variability in target volume delineation on CT scans of the breast. Int JRadiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 50: 1366-72.10.1016/S0360-3016(01)01635-2
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. 27. Song WY, Chiu B, Bauman GS, Lock M, Rodrigues G, Ash R, et al. Prostate contouring uncertainty in megavoltage computed tomography images acquired with a helical tomotherapy unit during image-guided radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 65: 595-607.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.01.049
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. 28. Huttenlocher DP, Klanderman GA, Rucklidge WJ. Comparing images using the Hausdorff distance. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEETransactions on 1993; 15: 850-63.10.1109/34.232073
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. 29. Bueno G, Déniz O, Salido J, Carrascosa C, Delgado JM. A geodesic deformable model for automatic segmentation of image sequences applied to radiation therapy. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2011; 6: 341-50.10.1007/s11548-010-0513-9
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. 30. Cardoso JS, Teixeira LF, Cardoso MJ. Automatic breast contour detection in digital photographs. In: Azevedo L, Londral AR, editors. Proceedingsof the First international conference on health informatics, HEALTHINF 2008. Volume 2. Funchal, Madeira, Portugal; January 28-31, 2008. INSTICC - Institute for Systems, Technologies of Information, Control, and Communication; 2008. pp. 91-8. ISBN: 978-989-8111-16-6.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. 31. Petric P, Hudej R, Rogelj P, Zobec Logar HB. 3D T2-weighted fast recovery fast spin echo sequence MRI for target contouring in cervix cancer brachytherapy. [Abstract]. Brachytherapy (N.Y., N.Y.) 2008; 7: 109-10.
    Search in Google Scholar
  32. 32. Zobec Logar HB, Hudej R, Rogelj P, Petric P. 3D fast recovery fast spin echo MRI for contouring in cervix cancer brachytherapy. [Abstract]. RadiotherOncol 2010; 96(Suppl 1): S205.
    Search in Google Scholar
  33. 33. Segedin B, But Hadzic J, Rogelj P, Sesek M, Zobec Logar HB, Kragelj B, et al. Interobserver variation in MRI and CT based contouring for prostate cancer. [Abstract]. Radiother Oncol 2011; 99(Suppl 1): S285.10.1016/S0167-8140(11)70837-4
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2013-0005 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 86 - 96
Published on: Feb 1, 2013
Published by: Association of Radiology and Oncology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
contouring,
contour comparison,
distance transform
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Clinical medicine,
Internal medicine,
Haematology, oncology,
Radiology

© 2013 Peter Rogel, Robert Hudej, Primoz Petric, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Previous articleVolume 47 (2013): Issue 1 (March 2013)