Deep nets vs expert designed features in medical physics: An IMRT QA case study

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of Deep Neural Networks against a technique designed by domain experts in the prediction of gamma passing rates for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance (IMRT QA). METHOD A total of 498 IMRT plans across all treatment sites were planned in Eclipse version 11 and delivered using a dynamic sliding window technique on Clinac iX or TrueBeam Linacs. Measurements were performed using a commercial 2D diode array, and passing rates for 3%/3 mm local dose/distance-to-agreement (DTA) were recorded. Separately, fluence maps calculated for each plan were used as inputs to a convolution neural network (CNN). The CNNs were trained to predict IMRT QA gamma passing rates using TensorFlow and Keras. A set of model architectures, inspired by the convolutional blocks of the VGG-16 ImageNet model, were constructed and implemented. Synthetic data, created by rotating and translating the fluence maps during training, was created to boost the performance of the CNNs. Dropout, batch normalization, and data augmentation were utilized to help train the model. The performance of the CNNs was compared to a generalized Poisson regression model, previously developed for this application, which used 78 expert designed features. RESULTS Deep Neural Networks without domain knowledge achieved comparable performance to a baseline system designed by domain experts in the prediction of 3%/3 mm Local gamma passing rates. An ensemble of neural nets resulted in a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.70 ± 0.05 and the domain expert model resulted in a 0.74 ± 0.06. CONCLUSIONS Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with transfer learning can predict IMRT QA passing rates by automatically designing features from the fluence maps without human expert supervision. Predictions from CNNs are comparable to a system carefully designed by physicist experts.

[1]  Alex Rubinsteyn,et al.  Using a Machine Learning Approach to Predict Outcomes after Radiosurgery for Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[2]  Michael S. Bernstein,et al.  ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge , 2014, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[3]  Wuyang Yang,et al.  A data-mining framework for large scale analysis of dose-outcome relationships in a database of irradiated head and neck cancer patients. , 2015, Medical physics.

[4]  L. Ungar,et al.  MediBoost: a Patient Stratification Tool for Interpretable Decision Making in the Era of Precision Medicine , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[5]  Timothy D. Solberg,et al.  IMRT QA using machine learning: A multi‐institutional validation , 2017, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[6]  Lyle Ungar,et al.  Using machine learning to predict radiation pneumonitis in patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy , 2016, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  Qiang Yang,et al.  A Survey on Transfer Learning , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[8]  Nima Tajbakhsh,et al.  Convolutional Neural Networks for Medical Image Analysis: Full Training or Fine Tuning? , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[9]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[10]  Xiang Zhang,et al.  OverFeat: Integrated Recognition, Localization and Detection using Convolutional Networks , 2013, ICLR.

[11]  E. Ford,et al.  Quantifying the performance of in vivo portal dosimetry in detecting four types of treatment parameter variations. , 2015, Medical physics.

[12]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition , 2014, ICLR.

[13]  Fang-Fang Yin,et al.  Utilizing knowledge from prior plans in the evaluation of quality assurance , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  Martin J. Murphy,et al.  Machine Learning in Radiation Oncology , 2015 .

[15]  Stefan Carlsson,et al.  CNN Features Off-the-Shelf: An Astounding Baseline for Recognition , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops.

[16]  Sasa Mutic,et al.  The report of Task Group 100 of the AAPM: Application of risk analysis methods to radiation therapy quality management. , 2016, Medical physics.

[17]  Sasa Mutic,et al.  Quality control quantification (QCQ): a tool to measure the value of quality control checks in radiation oncology. , 2012, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  Eduard Schreibmann,et al.  Prior‐knowledge treatment planning for volumetric arc therapy using feature‐based database mining , 2014, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[19]  Leyuan Shi,et al.  Modeling plan-related clinical complications using machine learning tools in a multiplan IMRT framework. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  T D Solberg,et al.  A mathematical framework for virtual IMRT QA using machine learning. , 2016, Medical physics.

[21]  Dumitru Erhan,et al.  Going deeper with convolutions , 2014, 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[22]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent. , 2010, Journal of statistical software.

[23]  Yann LeCun,et al.  Generalization and network design strategies , 1989 .

[24]  Ruijiang Li,et al.  Machine learning in radiation oncology : theory and applications , 2015 .

[25]  O Ates,et al.  Implementation of a Machine Learning–Based Automatic Contour Quality Assurance Tool for Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy of Prostate Cancer , 2016 .

[26]  So-Yeon Park,et al.  A machine learning approach to the accurate prediction of multi-leaf collimator positional errors , 2016, Physics in medicine and biology.

[27]  Kunihiko Fukushima,et al.  Neocognitron: A Self-Organizing Neural Network Model for a Mechanism of Visual Pattern Recognition , 1982 .

[28]  Gilmer Valdes,et al.  Clinical decision support of radiotherapy treatment planning: A data-driven machine learning strategy for patient-specific dosimetric decision making. , 2017, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[29]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Classification and Regression Trees , 1984 .

[30]  Qiongge Li,et al.  Predictive time‐series modeling using artificial neural networks for Linac beam symmetry: an empirical study , 2017, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[31]  Atsuto Maki,et al.  From generic to specific deep representations for visual recognition , 2014, 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW).

[32]  Gilmer Valdes,et al.  Use of TrueBeam developer mode for imaging QA , 2015, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[33]  J. Friedman Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. , 2001 .

[34]  Vincenzo Valentini,et al.  The future of predictive models in radiation oncology: from extensive data mining to reliable modeling of the results. , 2013, Future oncology.

[35]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[36]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[37]  J. Flickinger,et al.  Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Radiation Therapy Outcomes: A Clinician's Perspective. , 2015, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[38]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  How transferable are features in deep neural networks? , 2014, NIPS.

[39]  Joseph O. Deasy,et al.  Visual Analysis of the Daily QA Results of Photon and Electron Beams of a Trilogy Linac over a Five-year Period , 2015, International journal of medical physics, clinical engineering and radiation oncology.