ATLAAS: an automatic decision tree-based learning algorithm for advanced image segmentation in positron emission tomography

Accurate and reliable tumour delineation on positron emission tomography (PET) is crucial for radiotherapy treatment planning. PET automatic segmentation (PET-AS) eliminates intra- and interobserver variability, but there is currently no consensus on the optimal method to use, as different algorithms appear to perform better for different types of tumours. This work aimed to develop a predictive segmentation model, trained to automatically select and apply the best PET-AS method, according to the tumour characteristics. ATLAAS, the automatic decision tree-based learning algorithm for advanced segmentation is based on supervised machine learning using decision trees. The model includes nine PET-AS methods and was trained on a 100 PET scans with known true contour. A decision tree was built for each PET-AS algorithm to predict its accuracy, quantified using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), according to the tumour volume, tumour peak to background SUV ratio and a regional texture metric. The performance of ATLAAS was evaluated for 85 PET scans obtained from fillable and printed subresolution sandwich phantoms. ATLAAS showed excellent accuracy across a wide range of phantom data and predicted the best or near-best segmentation algorithm in 93% of cases. ATLAAS outperformed all single PET-AS methods on fillable phantom data with a DSC of 0.881, while the DSC for H&N phantom data was 0.819. DSCs higher than 0.650 were achieved in all cases. ATLAAS is an advanced automatic image segmentation algorithm based on decision tree predictive modelling, which can be trained on images with known true contour, to predict the best PET-AS method when the true contour is unknown. ATLAAS provides robust and accurate image segmentation with potential applications to radiation oncology.

[1]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Textural Features for Image Classification , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[2]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  Design of a benchmark platform for evaluating PET-based contouring accuracy in oncology applications , 2012 .

[3]  William M. Wells,et al.  Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE): an algorithm for the validation of image segmentation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[4]  Thomas M. Deserno,et al.  Deterioration of R-Wave Detection in Pathology and Noise: A Comprehensive Analysis Using Simultaneous Truth and Performance Level Estimation , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[5]  M. Hatt,et al.  Intratumor Heterogeneity Characterized by Textural Features on Baseline 18F-FDG PET Images Predicts Response to Concomitant Radiochemotherapy in Esophageal Cancer , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[6]  Joseph O Deasy,et al.  CERR: a computational environment for radiotherapy research. , 2003, Medical physics.

[7]  Andreas Bockisch,et al.  Segmentation of PET volumes by iterative image thresholding. , 2007, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[8]  G van Kaick,et al.  Glucose uptake, perfusion, and cell proliferation in head and neck tumors: relation of positron emission tomography to flow cytometry. , 1991, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[9]  Maximilien Vermandel,et al.  Is STAPLE algorithm confident to assess segmentation methods in PET imaging? , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  E. Spezi,et al.  Influence of cold walls on PET image quantification and volume segmentation: a phantom study. , 2013, Medical physics.

[11]  Ida Häggström,et al.  PETSTEP: Generation of synthetic PET lesions for fast evaluation of segmentation methods , 2015, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[12]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  Comparative methods for PET image segmentation in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma , 2010, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[13]  Paul Kinahan,et al.  Tumor delineation using PET in head and neck cancers: threshold contouring and lesion volumes. , 2006, Medical physics.

[14]  W. Roa,et al.  Iterative threshold segmentation for PET target volume delineation. , 2007, Medical physics.

[15]  Anne Bol,et al.  A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[16]  Gheorghe Iordanescu,et al.  Automatic segmentation of amyloid plaques in MR images using unsupervised support vector machines , 2012, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[17]  Rasmus Larsen,et al.  Segmenting Multiple Sclerosis Lesions Using a Spatially Constrained K-Nearest Neighbour Approach , 2012, ICIAR.

[18]  M. Miften,et al.  A region growing method for tumor volume segmentation on PET images for rectal and anal cancer patients. , 2009, Medical physics.

[19]  Martin Tabakov,et al.  Segmentation of histopathology HER2/neu images with fuzzy decision tree and Takagi-Sugeno reasoning , 2014, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[20]  Christian Roux,et al.  A Fuzzy Locally Adaptive Bayesian Segmentation Approach for Volume Determination in PET , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[21]  R. Dhanasekaran,et al.  Brain Tumor Detection and Classification of MR Images Using Texture Features and Fuzzy SVM Classifier , 2013 .

[22]  E Spezi,et al.  A novel phantom technique for evaluating the performance of PET auto-segmentation methods in delineating heterogeneous and irregular lesions , 2015, EJNMMI Physics.

[23]  Marcel van Herk,et al.  Reduction of observer variation using matched CT-PET for lung cancer delineation: a three-dimensional analysis. , 2006, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics.

[24]  Shiva K Das,et al.  Combining multiple FDG-PET radiotherapy target segmentation methods to reduce the effect of variable performance of individual segmentation methods. , 2013, Medical physics.

[25]  Brian O'Sullivan,et al.  Intraobserver and interobserver variability in GTV delineation on FDG-PET-CT images of head and neck cancers. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[26]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  PET-guided delineation of radiation therapy treatment volumes: a survey of image segmentation techniques , 2010, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[27]  Aboul Ella Hassanien,et al.  Breast cancer MRI diagnosis approach using support vector machine and pulse coupled neural networks , 2012, J. Appl. Log..

[28]  L. R. Dice Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association Between Species , 1945 .

[29]  Johan Wennerberg,et al.  2-Deoxy-2-[18F] fluoro-D-glucose uptake and correlation to intratumoral heterogeneity. , 2007, Anticancer research.

[30]  G. Bonniaud,et al.  /sup 18/F-FDG PET images segmentation using morphological watershed: a phantom study , 2006, 2006 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[31]  V. Grégoire,et al.  Molecular Imaging in Radiotherapy Planning for Head and Neck Tumors , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[32]  L. Massoptier,et al.  Impact of consensus contours from multiple PET segmentation methods on the accuracy of functional volume delineation , 2015, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[33]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  A novel fuzzy C-means algorithm for unsupervised heterogeneous tumor quantification in PET. , 2010, Medical physics.

[34]  Isaac N. Bankman,et al.  Handbook of medical image processing and analysis , 2009 .

[35]  Barton F Branstetter,et al.  Combined PET-CT in the head and neck: part 1. Physiologic, altered physiologic, and artifactual FDG uptake. , 2005, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[36]  E Spezi,et al.  Evaluation of advanced automatic PET segmentation methods using nonspherical thin-wall inserts. , 2014, Medical physics.

[37]  Koen L. Vincken,et al.  Probabilistic segmentation of brain tissue in MR imaging , 2005, NeuroImage.