Literature DB >> 30170101

A Deep Look Into the Future of Quantitative Imaging in Oncology: A Statement of Working Principles and Proposal for Change.

Olivier Morin1, Martin Vallières2, Arthur Jochems3, Henry C Woodruff3, Gilmer Valdes4, Steve E Braunstein4, Joachim E Wildberger5, Javier E Villanueva-Meyer6, Vasant Kearney4, Sue S Yom4, Timothy D Solberg4, Philippe Lambin3.   

Abstract

The adoption of enterprise digital imaging, along with the development of quantitative imaging methods and the re-emergence of statistical learning, has opened the opportunity for more personalized cancer treatments through transformative data science research. In the last 5 years, accumulating evidence has indicated that noninvasive advanced imaging analytics (i.e., radiomics) can reveal key components of tumor phenotype for multiple lesions at multiple time points over the course of treatment. Many groups using homegrown software have extracted engineered and deep quantitative features on 3-dimensional medical images for better spatial and longitudinal understanding of tumor biology and for the prediction of diverse outcomes. These developments could augment patient stratification and prognostication, buttressing emerging targeted therapeutic approaches. Unfortunately, the rapid growth in popularity of this immature scientific discipline has resulted in many early publications that miss key information or use underpowered patient data sets, without production of generalizable results. Quantitative imaging research is complex, and key principles should be followed to realize its full potential. The fields of quantitative imaging and radiomics in particular require a renewed focus on optimal study design and reporting practices, standardization, interpretability, data sharing, and clinical trials. Standardization of image acquisition, feature calculation, and statistical analysis (i.e., machine learning) are required for the field to move forward. A new data-sharing paradigm enacted among open and diverse participants (medical institutions, vendors and associations) should be embraced for faster development and comprehensive clinical validation of imaging biomarkers. In this review and critique of the field, we propose working principles and fundamental changes to the current scientific approach, with the goal of high-impact research and development of actionable prediction models that will yield more meaningful applications of precision cancer medicine.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30170101     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  24 in total

1.  An image-based deep learning framework for individualizing radiotherapy dose.

Authors:  Bin Lou; Semihcan Doken; Tingliang Zhuang; Danielle Wingerter; Mishka Gidwani; Nilesh Mistry; Lance Ladic; Ali Kamen; Mohamed E Abazeed
Journal:  Lancet Digit Health       Date:  2019-06-27

2.  Hierarchical Normalized Completely Random Measures for Robust Graphical Modeling.

Authors:  Andrea Cremaschi; Raffaele Argiento; Katherine Shoemaker; Christine Peterson; Marina Vannucci
Journal:  Bayesian Anal       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 3.728

3.  An artificial intelligence framework integrating longitudinal electronic health records with real-world data enables continuous pan-cancer prognostication.

Authors:  Olivier Morin; Martin Vallières; Steve Braunstein; Jorge Barrios Ginart; Taman Upadhaya; Henry C Woodruff; Alex Zwanenburg; Avishek Chatterjee; Javier E Villanueva-Meyer; Gilmer Valdes; William Chen; Julian C Hong; Sue S Yom; Timothy D Solberg; Steffen Löck; Jan Seuntjens; Catherine Park; Philippe Lambin
Journal:  Nat Cancer       Date:  2021-07-22

Review 4.  Radiomic Analysis: Study Design, Statistical Analysis, and Other Bias Mitigation Strategies.

Authors:  Chaya S Moskowitz; Mattea L Welch; Michael A Jacobs; Brenda F Kurland; Amber L Simpson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 29.146

Review 5.  Role of Artificial Intelligence in Radiogenomics for Cancers in the Era of Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Sanjay Saxena; Biswajit Jena; Neha Gupta; Suchismita Das; Deepaneeta Sarmah; Pallab Bhattacharya; Tanmay Nath; Sudip Paul; Mostafa M Fouda; Manudeep Kalra; Luca Saba; Gyan Pareek; Jasjit S Suri
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 6.575

6.  Machine learning based evaluation of clinical and pretreatment 18F-FDG-PET/CT radiomic features to predict prognosis of cervical cancer patients.

Authors:  Masatoyo Nakajo; Megumi Jinguji; Atsushi Tani; Erina Yano; Chin Khang Hoo; Daisuke Hirahara; Shinichi Togami; Hiroaki Kobayashi; Takashi Yoshiura
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-11-25

7.  External validation of radiomics-based predictive models in low-dose CT screening for early lung cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Noemi Garau; Chiara Paganelli; Paul Summers; Wookjin Choi; Sadegh Alam; Wei Lu; Cristiana Fanciullo; Massimo Bellomi; Guido Baroni; Cristiano Rampinelli
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Application of a Machine Learning Approach for the Analysis of Clinical and Radiomic Features of Pretreatment [18F]-FDG PET/CT to Predict Prognosis of Patients with Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Masatoyo Nakajo; Megumi Jinguji; Atsushi Tani; Hidehiko Kikuno; Daisuke Hirahara; Shinichi Togami; Hiroaki Kobayashi; Takashi Yoshiura
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 3.488

9.  MRI-Based Radiomics to Differentiate between Benign and Malignant Parotid Tumors With External Validation.

Authors:  Francesca Piludu; Simona Marzi; Marco Ravanelli; Raul Pellini; Renato Covello; Irene Terrenato; Davide Farina; Riccardo Campora; Valentina Ferrazzoli; Antonello Vidiri
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 6.244

10.  The Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative: Standardized Quantitative Radiomics for High-Throughput Image-based Phenotyping.

Authors:  Alex Zwanenburg; Martin Vallières; Mahmoud A Abdalah; Hugo J W L Aerts; Vincent Andrearczyk; Aditya Apte; Saeed Ashrafinia; Spyridon Bakas; Roelof J Beukinga; Ronald Boellaard; Marta Bogowicz; Luca Boldrini; Irène Buvat; Gary J R Cook; Christos Davatzikos; Adrien Depeursinge; Marie-Charlotte Desseroit; Nicola Dinapoli; Cuong Viet Dinh; Sebastian Echegaray; Issam El Naqa; Andriy Y Fedorov; Roberto Gatta; Robert J Gillies; Vicky Goh; Michael Götz; Matthias Guckenberger; Sung Min Ha; Mathieu Hatt; Fabian Isensee; Philippe Lambin; Stefan Leger; Ralph T H Leijenaar; Jacopo Lenkowicz; Fiona Lippert; Are Losnegård; Klaus H Maier-Hein; Olivier Morin; Henning Müller; Sandy Napel; Christophe Nioche; Fanny Orlhac; Sarthak Pati; Elisabeth A G Pfaehler; Arman Rahmim; Arvind U K Rao; Jonas Scherer; Muhammad Musib Siddique; Nanna M Sijtsema; Jairo Socarras Fernandez; Emiliano Spezi; Roel J H M Steenbakkers; Stephanie Tanadini-Lang; Daniela Thorwarth; Esther G C Troost; Taman Upadhaya; Vincenzo Valentini; Lisanne V van Dijk; Joost van Griethuysen; Floris H P van Velden; Philip Whybra; Christian Richter; Steffen Löck
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 29.146

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.