Comparison of deep learning-based segmentation and registration using pre-treatment contours for online rectal delineation in magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy

Publication date

2025-10

Authors

Kolenbrander, Iris
Kuijer, Koen M.
Savenije, Mark H.F.
Meijer, Gert JORCID 0000-0001-7275-319XISNI 0000000389724736
Intven, Martijn PwORCID 0000-0002-5068-5517ISNI 0000000393019546
Pluim, Josien P WORCID 0000-0001-7327-9178ISNI 000000014097262X
Maspero, MatteoORCID 0000-0003-0347-3375

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

cc_by

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Deep learning promises accurate target contouring for online adaptive MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) in rectal cancer. However, delineating the mesorectal clinical target volume (CTV) remains challenging. Integrating planning-based contours, delineated offline before treatment, can provide anatomical shape and boundary information. This study evaluated deep learning-based segmentation and registration models to determine the optimal approach for incorporating planning contours into online rectal contouring. Materials and Methods: Deep learning-based segmentation and registration models, both U-Nets, were developed using MRI of 104 rectal cancer patients, split into 68, 14, and 22 training, validation, and testing subjects. The segmentation model used the planning CTV and daily fraction MRI, while the registration model used the planning MRI and CTV and the daily fraction MRI. The models were compared in terms of contour accuracy (maximum Hausdorff distance (HD), Dice, and a qualitative score) and robustness against domain shifts. Results: When incorporating the planning contour, the segmentation and registration models achieved comparable median HD values of 9.3 mm (interquartile range, IQR: 7.1-12.1) and 10.2 (8.2-12.4) (p=0.18), respectively. However, segmentation achieved lower HD values in the middle and cranial regions of the target (HDmiddle: 5.3 mm (4.3-6.6) vs. 6.0 mm (4.8-8.0), p<0.05; HDcranial: 7.6 mm (6.3-10.7) vs. 9.6 mm (7.5-11.9), p<0.05). In addition, segmentation resulted in more clinically acceptable contours (9/10 versus 3/10) and was more robust to rectum volume variations than registration. Conclusion: Deep learning-based segmentation was identified as the optimal approach for incorporating the planning CTV into online rectal delineation in MRgRT.

Keywords

Convolutional neural networks, Deep learning, Online adaptive radiotherapy, Registration, Segmentation, Target contouring, Radiation, Oncology, Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Citation

Kolenbrander, I D, Kuijer, K M, Savenije, M H F, Meijer, G J, Intven, M P W, Pluim, J P W & Maspero, M 2025, 'Comparison of deep learning-based segmentation and registration using pre-treatment contours for online rectal delineation in magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy', Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology, vol. 36, 100854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2025.100854