Establishment and interpretation of the gamma pass rate prediction model based on radiomics for different intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques in the pelvis

• Published in: Frontiers in physics Vol. 11
• Main Authors: Ni, Qianxi, Zhu, Jun, Chen, Luqiao, Tan, Jianfeng, Pang, Jinmeng, Sun, Xiangshang, Yang, Xiaohua
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Frontiers Media S.A 10.08.2023
• Subjects: gamma pass rate; intensity-modulated radiation therapy; machine learning; model interpretation; radiomics
• ISSN: 2296-424X; 2296-424X
• DOI: 10.3389/fphy.2023.1217275

Background and objectives: Implementation of patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) is a crucial aspect of precise radiotherapy. Various machine learning-based models have showed potential as virtual quality assurance tools, being capable of accurately predicting the dose verification results of fixed-beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, thereby ensuring safe and efficient treatment for patients. However, there has been no research yet that simultaneously integrates different IMRT techniques to predict the gamma pass rate (GPR) and explain the model. Methods: Retrospective analysis of the 3D dosimetric verification results based on measurements with gamma pass rate criteria of 3%/2 mm and 10% dose threshold of 409 pelvic IMRT and VMAT plans was carried out. Radiomics features were extracted from the dose files, from which the XGBoost algorithm based on SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values was used to select the optimal feature subset as the input for the prediction model. The study employed four different machine learning algorithms, namely, random forest (RF), adaptive boosting (AdaBoost), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), to construct predictive models. Sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and AUC value were calculated to evaluate the classification performance of these models. The SHAP values were utilized to perform a related interpretive analysis on the best performing model. Results: The sensitivities and specificities of the RF, AdaBoost, XGBoost, and LightGBM models were 0.96, 0.82, 0.93, and 0.89, and 0.38, 0.54, 0.62, and 0.62, respectively. The F1 scores and area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.86, 0.81, 0.88, and 0.86, and 0.81, 0.77, 0.85, and 0.83, respectively. The explanation of the model output based on SHAP values can provide a reference basis for medical physicists when adjusting the plan, thereby improving the efficiency and quality of treatment plans. Conclusion: It is feasible to use a machine learning method based on radiomics to establish a gamma pass rate classification prediction model for IMRT and VMAT plans in the pelvis. The XGBoost model performs better in classification than the other three tree-based ensemble models, and global explanations and single-sample explanations of the model output through SHAP values may offer reference for medical physicists to provide high-quality plans, promoting the clinical application and implementation of GPR prediction models, and providing safe and efficient personalized QA management for patients.