↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility of anatomical feature points for the estimation of prostate locations in the Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Radiological Physics and Technology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Feasibility of anatomical feature points for the estimation of prostate locations in the Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy
Published in
Radiological Physics and Technology, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12194-018-0481-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kenta Ninomiya, Hidetaka Arimura, Motoki Sasahara, Yudai Kai, Taka-aki Hirose, Saiji Ohga

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of anatomical feature points for the estimation of prostate locations in the Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy. The relationships between the reference centroids of prostate regions (CPRs) (prostate locations) and anatomical feature points were explored, and the most feasible anatomical feature points were selected based on the smallest location estimation errors of CPRs and the largest Dice's similarity coefficient (DSC) between the reference and extracted prostates. The reference CPRs were calculated according to reference prostate contours determined by radiation oncologists. Five anatomical feature points were manually determined on a prostate, bladder, and rectum in a sagittal plane of a planning computed tomography image for each case. The CPRs were estimated using three machine learning architectures [artificial neural network, random forest, and support vector machine (SVM)], which learned the relationships between the reference CPRs and anatomical feature points. The CPRs were applied for placing a prostate probabilistic atlas at the coordinates and extracting prostate regions using a Bayesian delineation framework. The average estimation errors without and with SVM using three feature points, which indicated the best performance, were 5.6 ± 3.7 mm and 1.8 ± 1.0 mm, respectively (the smallest error) (p < 0.001). The average DSCs without and with SVM using the three feature points were 0.69 ± 0.13 and 0.82 ± 0.055, respectively (the highest DSC) (p < 0.001). The anatomical feature points may be feasible for the estimation of prostate locations, which can be applied to the general Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 26%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 30%
Computer Science 4 17%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2018.
All research outputs
#18,650,639
of 23,105,443 outputs
Outputs from Radiological Physics and Technology
#91
of 131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,371
of 341,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiological Physics and Technology
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,105,443 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 131 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,609 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.