JOURNAL ARTICLE

Additional file 1 of Evaluation of deep learning-based autosegmentation in breast cancer radiotherapy

Abstract

Additional file 1. Table S1. Summary of DSC and HD for sensitivity analyses; Table S2. Total contouring time for all organs at risk of each patient; Table S3. Time for manual contouring, according to each organ at risk; Table S4. Time for correcting autocontours, according to each organ at risk; Figure S1. (A) Dice similarity coefficient and (B) Hausdorff distance values, based on the organ at risk. Manual contours, corrected autocontours, and autocontours are compared. For the sensitivity analyses, contouring metrics were obtained by comparing each contour with the secondbest contour; Figure S2. Radar graphs showing the mean Dice similarity coefficient value of each participant, based on the organ. (A) Manual contours. (B) Corrected autocontours. The Dice similarity coefficient values of the corrected autocontours were more homogeneous than those of the manual contours, which indicate reduced interphysician variability. For sensitivity analyses, contouring metrics were obtained by comparing each contour with the second-best contour.

Keywords:
Nucleofection TSG101 Gestational period Fusible alloy Articular cartilage damage Diafiltration Tubulopathy Proteogenomics

Metrics

0
Cited By
0.00
FWCI (Field Weighted Citation Impact)
0
Refs
0.35
Citation Normalized Percentile
Is in top 1%
Is in top 10%

Topics

Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Physical Sciences →  Physics and Astronomy →  Radiation
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Life Sciences →  Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology →  Cancer Research
AI in cancer detection
Physical Sciences →  Computer Science →  Artificial Intelligence

Related Documents

© 2026 ScienceGate Book Chapters — All rights reserved.