Repository logo
 
Publication

Clinical validation of a graphical method for radiation therapy plan quality assessment

2020-03Journal article Open access
Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorVentura, Tiago
dc.contributor.authorDias, Joana
dc.contributor.authorKhouri, Leila
dc.contributor.authorNetto, Eduardo
dc.contributor.authorSoares, André
dc.contributor.authorCosta Ferreira, Brigida
dc.contributor.authorRocha, Humberto
dc.contributor.authorLopes, Maria do Carmo
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-12T11:40:21Z
dc.date.available2022-01-12T11:40:21Z
dc.date.issued2020-03
dc.description.abstractBackground: This work aims at clinically validating a graphical tool developed for treatment plan assessment, named SPIDERplan, by comparing the plan choices based on its scoring with the radiation oncologists (RO) clinical preferences. Methods: SPIDERplan validation was performed for nasopharynx pathology in two steps. In the first step, three ROs from three Portuguese radiotherapy departments were asked to blindly evaluate and rank the dose distributions of twenty pairs of treatment plans. For plan ranking, the best plan from each pair was selected. For plan evaluation, the qualitative classification of ‘Good’, ‘Admissible with minor deviations’ and ‘Not Admissible’ were assigned to each plan. In the second step, SPIDERplan was applied to the same twenty patient cases. The tool was configured for two sets of structures groups: the local clinical set and the groups of structures suggested in international guidelines for nasopharynx cancer. Group weights, quantifying the importance of each group and incorporated in SPIDERplan, were defined according to RO clinical preferences and determined automatically by applying a mixed linear programming model for implicit elicitation of preferences. Intra- and inter-rater ROs plan selection and evaluation were assessed using Brennan-Prediger kappa coefficient. Results: Two-thirds of the plans were qualitatively evaluated by the ROs as ‘Good’. Concerning intra- and inter-rater variabilities of plan selection, fair agreements were obtained for most of the ROs. For plan evaluation, substantial agreements were verified in most cases. The choice of the best plan made by SPIDERplan was identical for all sets of groups and, in most cases, agreed with RO plan selection. Differences between RO choice and SPIDERplan analysis only occurred in cases for which the score differences between the plans was very low. A score difference threshold of 0.005 was defined as the value below which two plans are considered of equivalent quality. Conclusion: Generally, SPIDERplan response successfully reproduced the ROs plan selection. SPIDERplan assessment performance can represent clinical preferences based either on manual or automatic group weight assignment. For nasopharynx cases, SPIDERplan was robust in terms of the definitions of structure groups, being able to support different configurations without losing accuracy.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13014-020-01507-5pt_PT
dc.identifier.issn1748-717X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.22/19423
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherBMCpt_PT
dc.relationPOCI-01-0145-FEDER-028030pt_PT
dc.relationInstitute for Systems Engineering and Computers at Coimbra
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://ro-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13014-020-01507-5pt_PT
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/pt_PT
dc.subjectClinical validationpt_PT
dc.subjectDecision-makingpt_PT
dc.subjectPlan quality assessmentpt_PT
dc.titleClinical validation of a graphical method for radiation therapy plan quality assessmentpt_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.awardTitleInstitute for Systems Engineering and Computers at Coimbra
oaire.awardURIinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/6817 - DCRRNI ID/UID%2FMulti%2F00308%2F2019/PT
oaire.citation.issue1pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleRadiation Oncologypt_PT
oaire.citation.volume15pt_PT
oaire.fundingStream6817 - DCRRNI ID
person.familyNameCosta Ferreira
person.givenNameBrigida
person.identifier1167997
person.identifier.ciencia-idA61B-E07B-84B3
person.identifier.orcid0000-0001-7988-7545
person.identifier.scopus-author-id14050253300
project.funder.identifierhttp://doi.org/10.13039/501100001871
project.funder.nameFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationeac8b2c3-0ef3-48f5-a3c7-8ca796a098ae
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryeac8b2c3-0ef3-48f5-a3c7-8ca796a098ae
relation.isProjectOfPublication0cf45b44-715b-4991-b829-780670db60e7
relation.isProjectOfPublication.latestForDiscovery0cf45b44-715b-4991-b829-780670db60e7

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
s13014-020-01507-5.pdf
Size:
906.63 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

ESS - RADT - Artigos