Automated Lugano Metabolic Response Assessment in
Journal
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
ISSN: 1527-7755
Titre abrégé: J Clin Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8309333
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Jun 2024
06 Jun 2024
Historique:
medline:
6
6
2024
pubmed:
6
6
2024
entrez:
6
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Artificial intelligence can reduce the time used by physicians on radiological assessments. For Here, we present a deep learning-based algorithm for fully automated treatment response assessments according to the Lugano 2014 classification. The proposed four-stage method, trained on a multicountry clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01287741) and tested in three independent multicenter and multicountry test sets on different non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes and different lines of treatment (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02257567, NCT02500407, 20% holdout in ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01287741), outputs the detected lesions at baseline and follow-up to enable focused radiologist review. The method's response assessment achieved high agreement with the adjudicated radiologic responses (eg, agreement for overall response assessment of 93%, 87%, and 85% in ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01287741, NCT02500407, and NCT02257567, respectively) similar to inter-radiologist agreement and was strongly prognostic of outcomes with a trend toward higher accuracy for death risk than adjudicated radiologic responses (hazard ratio for end of treatment by-model CMR of 0.123, 0.054, and 0.205 in ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01287741, NCT02500407, and NCT02257567, compared with, respectively, 0.226, 0.292, and 0.272 for CMR by the adjudicated responses). Furthermore, a radiologist review of the algorithm's assessments was conducted. The radiologist median review time was 1.38 minutes/assessment, and no statistically significant differences were observed in the level of agreement of the radiologist with the model's response compared with the level of agreement of the radiologist with the adjudicated responses. These results suggest that the proposed method can be incorporated into radiologic response assessment workflows in cancer imaging for significant time savings and with performance similar to trained medical experts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38843483
doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.01978
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02500407', 'NCT02257567', 'NCT01287741']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM