Sebastian Lettmaier

Thomas Weissmann, Yixing Huang, Stefan Fischer et al.

Background: Deep learning (DL)-based head and neck lymph node level (HN_LNL) autodelineation is of high relevance to radiotherapy research and clinical treatment planning but still underinvestigated in academic literature. Methods: An expert-delineated cohort of 35 planning CTs was used for training of an nnU-net 3D-fullres/2D-ensemble model for autosegmentation of 20 different HN_LNL. A second cohort acquired at the same institution later in time served as the test set (n=20). In a completely blinded evaluation, 3 clinical experts rated the quality of DL autosegmentations in a head-to-head comparison with expert-created contours. For a subgroup of 10 cases, intraobserver variability was compared to the average DL autosegmentation accuracy on the original and recontoured set of expert segmentations. A postprocessing step to adjust craniocaudal boundaries of level autosegmentations to the CT slice plane was introduced and the effect on geometric accuracy and expert rating was investigated. Results: Blinded expert ratings for DL segmentations and expert-created contours were not significantly different. DL segmentations with slice plane adjustment were rated numerically higher (mean, 81.0 vs. 79.6,p=0.185) and DL segmentations without slice plane adjustment were rated numerically lower (77.2 vs. 79.6,p=0.167) than manually drawn contours. DL segmentations with CT slice plane adjustment were rated significantly better than DL contours without slice plane adjustment (81.0 vs. 77.2,p=0.004). Geometric accuracy of DL segmentations was not different from intraobserver variability (mean, 0.76 vs. 0.77, p=0.307). Conclusions: We show that a nnU-net 3D-fullres/2D-ensemble model can be used for highly accurate autodelineation of HN_LNL using only a limited training dataset that is ideally suited for large-scale standardized autodelineation of HN_LNL in the research setting.

Florian Putz, Johanna Grigo, Thomas Weissmann et al.

Background: Tumor segmentation in MRI is crucial in radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning for brain tumor patients. Segment anything (SA), a novel promptable foundation model for autosegmentation, has shown high accuracy for multiple segmentation tasks but was not evaluated on medical datasets yet. Methods: SA was evaluated in a point-to-mask task for glioma brain tumor autosegmentation on 16744 transversal slices from 369 MRI datasets (BraTS 2020). Up to 9 point prompts were placed per slice. Tumor core (enhancing tumor + necrotic core) was segmented on contrast-enhanced T1w sequences. Out of the 3 masks predicted by SA, accuracy was evaluated for the mask with the highest calculated IoU (oracle mask) and with highest model predicted IoU (suggested mask). In addition to assessing SA on whole MRI slices, SA was also evaluated on images cropped to the tumor (max. 3D extent + 2 cm). Results: Mean best IoU (mbIoU) using oracle mask on full MRI slices was 0.762 (IQR 0.713-0.917). Best 2D mask was achieved after a mean of 6.6 point prompts (IQR 5-9). Segmentation accuracy was significantly better for high- compared to low-grade glioma cases (mbIoU 0.789 vs. 0.668). Accuracy was worse using MRI slices cropped to the tumor (mbIoU 0.759) and was much worse using suggested mask (full slices 0.572). For all experiments, accuracy was low on peripheral slices with few tumor voxels (mbIoU, <300: 0.537 vs. >=300: 0.841). Stacking best oracle segmentations from full axial MRI slices, mean 3D DSC for tumor core was 0.872, which was improved to 0.919 by combining axial, sagittal and coronal masks. Conclusions: The Segment Anything foundation model, while trained on photos, can achieve high zero-shot accuracy for glioma brain tumor segmentation on MRI slices. The results suggest that Segment Anything can accelerate and facilitate RT treatment planning, when properly integrated in a clinical application.

Yixing Huang, Ahmed Gomaa, Sabine Semrau et al.

The potential of large language models in medicine for education and decision making purposes has been demonstrated as they achieve decent scores on medical exams such as the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) and the MedQA exam. In this work, we evaluate the performance of ChatGPT-4 in the specialized field of radiation oncology using the 38th American College of Radiology (ACR) radiation oncology in-training (TXIT) exam and the 2022 Red Journal Gray Zone cases. For the TXIT exam, ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 have achieved the scores of 63.65% and 74.57%, respectively, highlighting the advantage of the latest ChatGPT-4 model. Based on the TXIT exam, ChatGPT-4's strong and weak areas in radiation oncology are identified to some extent. Specifically, ChatGPT-4 demonstrates better knowledge of statistics, CNS & eye, pediatrics, biology, and physics than knowledge of bone & soft tissue and gynecology, as per the ACR knowledge domain. Regarding clinical care paths, ChatGPT-4 performs better in diagnosis, prognosis, and toxicity than brachytherapy and dosimetry. It lacks proficiency in in-depth details of clinical trials. For the Gray Zone cases, ChatGPT-4 is able to suggest a personalized treatment approach to each case with high correctness and comprehensiveness. Importantly, it provides novel treatment aspects for many cases, which are not suggested by any human experts. Both evaluations demonstrate the potential of ChatGPT-4 in medical education for the general public and cancer patients, as well as the potential to aid clinical decision-making, while acknowledging its limitations in certain domains. Because of the risk of hallucination, facts provided by ChatGPT always need to be verified.

Florian Putz, Marlen Haderleina, Sebastian Lettmaier et al.

Thanks to the rapidly evolving integration of LLMs into decision-support tools, a significant transformation is happening across large-scale systems. Like other medical fields, the use of LLMs such as GPT-4 is gaining increasing interest in radiation oncology as well. An attempt to assess GPT-4's performance in radiation oncology was made via a dedicated 100-question examination on the highly specialized topic of radiation oncology physics, revealing GPT-4's superiority over other LLMs. GPT-4's performance on a broader field of clinical radiation oncology is further benchmarked by the ACR Radiation Oncology In-Training (TXIT) exam where GPT-4 achieved a high accuracy of 74.57%. Its performance on re-labelling structure names in accordance with the AAPM TG-263 report has also been benchmarked, achieving above 96% accuracies. Such studies shed light on the potential of LLMs in radiation oncology. As interest in the potential and constraints of LLMs in general healthcare applications continues to rise5, the capabilities and limitations of LLMs in radiation oncology decision support have not yet been fully explored.