Search

Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging as a technology with the power to transform established industries, and with applications from automated manufacturing to advertising and facial recognition to fully autonomous transportation. Advances in each of these domains have led some to call AI the "fourth" industrial revolution [1]. In healthcare, AI is emerging as both a productive and disruptive force across many disciplines. This is perhaps most evident in Diagnostic Radiology and Pathology, specialties largely built around the processing and complex interpretation of medical images, where the role of AI is increasingly seen as both a boon and a threat. In Radiation Oncology as well, AI seems poised to reshape the specialty in significant ways, though the impact of AI has been relatively limited at present, and may rightly seem more distant to many, given the predominantly interpersonal and complex interventional nature of the specialty. In this overview, we will explore the current state and anticipated future impact of AI on Radiation Oncology, in detail, focusing on key topics from multiple stakeholder perspectives, as well as the role our specialty may play in helping to shape the future of AI within the larger spectrum of medicine.

Simple Summary: While tumor cell invasion beyond the surgically resectable "margin" of glioblastoma is thought to be associated with nearly 100% of recurrences and poor survival, no reliable methods exist for mapping the location of invading tumor cells within the human brain. Building on prior work demonstrating the ability of Q-space magnetic resonance imaging (QSI) to highlight structural alterations in tissue architecture, we hypothesized that using this imaging method to construct tumor-associated tractography might identify tumor-specific structures that underlie cellular invasion. Our results demonstrate that such tractography patterns can be observed in a tumor-specific manner, and provide preliminary evidence that those patterns may colocalize with invading tumor cells, and metrics derived from them may be associated with patient survival time. Background: The invasion of glioblastoma cells beyond the visible tumor margin depicted by conventional neuroimaging is believed to mediate recurrence and predict poor survival. Radiomic biomarkers that are associated with the direction and extent of tumor infiltration are, however, non-existent. Methods: Patients from a single center with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (n = 7) underwent preoperative Q-space magnetic resonance imaging (QSI; 3T, 64 gradient directions, b = 1000 s/mm2) between 2018 and 2019. Tumors were manually segmented, and patterns of inter-voxel coherence spatially intersecting each segmentation were generated to represent tumor-associated tractography. One patient additionally underwent regional biopsy of diffusion tract- versus non-tract-associated tissue during tumor resection for RNA sequencing. Imaging data from this cohort were compared with a historical cohort of n = 66 glioblastoma patients who underwent similar QSI scans. Associations of tractography-derived metrics with survival were assessed using t-tests, linear regression, and Kaplan–Meier statistics. Patient-derived glioblastoma xenograft (PDX) mice generated with the sub-hippocampal injection of human-derived glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) were scanned under high-field conditions (QSI, 7T, 512 gradient directions), and tumor-associated tractography was compared with the 3D microscopic reconstruction of immunostained GSCs. Results: In the principal enrollment cohort of patients with glioblastoma, all cases displayed tractography patterns with tumor-intersecting tract bundles extending into brain parenchyma, a phenotype which was reproduced in PDX mice as well as in a larger comparison cohort of glioblastoma patients (n = 66), when applying similar methods. Reconstructed spatial patterns of GSCs in PDX mice closely mirrored tumor-associated tractography. On a Kaplan–Meier survival analysis of n = 66 patients, the calculated intra-tumoral mean diffusivity predicted the overall survival (p = 0.037), as did tractography-associated features including mean tract length (p = 0.039) and mean projecting tract length (p = 0.022). The RNA sequencing of human tissue samples (n = 13 tumor samples from a single patient) revealed the overexpression of transcripts which regulate cell motility in tract-associated samples. Conclusions: QSI discriminates tumor-specific patterns of inter-voxel coherence believed to represent white matter pathways which may be susceptible to glioblastoma invasion. These findings may lay the groundwork for future work on therapeutic targeting, patient stratification, and prognosis in glioblastoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Head and neck (HN) gross tumor volume (GTV) auto‐segmentation is challenging due to the morphological complexity and low image contrast of targets. Multi‐modality images, including computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET), are used in the routine clinic to assist radiation oncologists for accurate GTV delineation. However, the availability of PET imaging may not always be guaranteed. Purpose: To develop a deep learning segmentation framework for automated GTV delineation of HN cancers using a combination of PET/CT images, while addressing the challenge of missing PET data. Methods: Two datasets were included for this study: Dataset I: 524 (training) and 359 (testing) oropharyngeal cancer patients from different institutions with their PET/CT pairs provided by the HECKTOR Challenge; Dataset II: 90 HN patients(testing) from a local institution with their planning CT, PET/CT pairs. To handle potentially missing PET images, a model training strategy named the "Blank Channel" method was implemented. To simulate the absence of a PET image, a blank array with the same dimensions as the CT image was generated to meet the dual‐channel input requirement of the deep learning model. During the model training process, the model was randomly presented with either a real PET/CT pair or a blank/CT pair. This allowed the model to learn the relationship between the CT image and the corresponding GTV delineation based on available modalities. As a result, our model had the ability to handle flexible inputs during prediction, making it suitable for cases where PET images are missing. To evaluate the performance of our proposed model, we trained it using training patients from Dataset I and tested it with Dataset II. We compared our model (Model 1) with two other models which were trained for specific modality segmentations: Model 2 trained with only CT images, and Model 3 trained with real PET/CT pairs. The performance of the models was evaluated using quantitative metrics, including Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), mean surface distance (MSD), and 95% Hausdorff Distance (HD95). In addition, we evaluated our Model 1 and Model 3 using the 359 test cases in Dataset I. Results: Our proposed model(Model 1) achieved promising results for GTV auto‐segmentation using PET/CT images, with the flexibility of missing PET images. Specifically, when assessed with only CT images in Dataset II, Model 1 achieved DSC of 0.56 ± 0.16, MSD of 3.4 ± 2.1 mm, and HD95 of 13.9 ± 7.6 mm. When the PET images were included, the performance of our model was improved to DSC of 0.62 ± 0.14, MSD of 2.8 ± 1.7 mm, and HD95 of 10.5 ± 6.5 mm. These results are comparable to those achieved by Model 2 and Model 3, illustrating Model 1′s effectiveness in utilizing flexible input modalities. Further analysis using the test dataset from Dataset I showed that Model 1 achieved an average DSC of 0.77, surpassing the overall average DSC of 0.72 among all participants in the HECKTOR Challenge. Conclusions: We successfully refined a multi‐modal segmentation tool for accurate GTV delineation for HN cancer. Our method addressed the issue of missing PET images by allowing flexible data input, thereby providing a practical solution for clinical settings where access to PET imaging may be limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the era of big data, the utilization of machine learning algorithms in radiation oncology is rapidly growing with applications including: treatment response modeling, treatment planning, contouring, organ segmentation, image-guidance, motion tracking, quality assurance, and more. Despite this interest, practical clinical implementation of machine learning as part of the day-to-day clinical operations is still lagging. The aim of this white paper is to further promote progress in this new field of machine learning in radiation oncology by highlighting its untapped advantages and potentials for clinical advancement, while also presenting current challenges and open questions for future research. The targeted audience of this paper includes newcomers as well as practitioners in the field of medical physics/radiation oncology. The paper also provides general recommendations to avoid common pitfalls when applying these powerful data analytic tools to medical physics and radiation oncology problems and suggests some guidelines for transparent and informative reporting of machine learning results.

It is an exciting time for big data efforts in radiation oncology. The use of big data to help aid both outcomes and decision-making research is becoming a reality. However, there are true challenges that exist in the space of gathering and utilizing performance and outcomes data. Here, we summarize the current state of big data in radiation oncology with respect to outcomes and discuss some of the efforts and challenges in radiation oncology big data.

A substantial barrier to the single- and multi-institutional aggregation of data to supporting clinical trials, practice quality improvement efforts, and development of big data analytics resource systems is the lack of standardized nomenclatures for expressing dosimetric data. To address this issue, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 263 was charged with providing nomenclature guidelines and values in radiation oncology for use in clinical trials, data-pooling initiatives, population-based studies, and routine clinical care by standardizing: (1) structure names across image processing and treatment planning system platforms; (2) nomenclature for dosimetric data (eg, dose-volume histogram [DVH]-based metrics); (3) templates for clinical trial groups and users of an initial subset of software platforms to facilitate adoption of the standards; (4) formalism for nomenclature schema, which can accommodate the addition of other structures defined in the future. A multisociety, multidisciplinary, multinational group of 57 members representing stake holders ranging from large academic centers to community clinics and vendors was assembled, including physicists, physicians, dosimetrists, and vendors. The stakeholder groups represented in the membership included the AAPM, American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), NRG Oncology, European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO), Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), Children's Oncology Group (COG), Integrating Healthcare Enterprise in Radiation Oncology (IHE-RO), and Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine working group (DICOM WG); A nomenclature system for target and organ at risk volumes and DVH nomenclature was developed and piloted to demonstrate viability across a range of clinics and within the framework of clinical trials. The final report was approved by AAPM in October 2017. The approval process included review by 8 AAPM committees, with additional review by ASTRO, European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO), and American Association of Medical Dosimetrists (AAMD). This Executive Summary of the report highlights the key recommendations for clinical practice, research, and trials.

Disease progression in clinical trials is commonly defined by radiologic measures. However, clinical progression may be more meaningful to patients, may occur even when radiologic criteria for progression are not met, and often requires a change in therapy in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to determine the utilization of clinical progression criteria within progression‐based trial endpoints among phase III trials testing systemic therapies for metastatic solid tumors. The primary manuscripts and protocols of phase III trials were reviewed for whether clinical events, such as refractory pain, tumor bleeding, or neurologic compromise, could constitute a progression event. Univariable logistic regression computed odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI for associations between trial‐level covariates and clinical progression. A total of 216 trials enrolling 148,190 patients were included, with publication dates from 2006 through 2020. A major change in clinical status was included in the progression criteria of 13% of trials (n = 27), most commonly as a secondary endpoint (n = 22). Only 59% of trials (n = 16) reported distinct clinical progression outcomes that constituted the composite surrogate endpoint. Compared with other disease sites, genitourinary trials were more likely to include clinical progression definitions (16/33 [48%] vs. 11/183 [6%]; OR, 14.72; 95% CI, 5.99 to 37.84; p <.0001). While major tumor‐related clinical events were seldom considered as disease progression events, increased attention to clinical progression may improve the meaningfulness and clinical applicability of surrogate endpoints for patients with metastatic solid tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance Few recent studies have examined neurocognitive functioning (NCF) in patients with sinonasal and nasopharyngeal cancers (NPCs) prior to and following multimodality therapy or the potential differences in NCF by disease variables such as disease site. Objective The objective of this study is to determine rates of NCF impairments prior to and following multimodality therapy, declines in NCF following radiotherapy (RT), and possible differences in NCF by the disease site. Design, Setting, and Participants We conducted a retrospective chart review of 39 patients with sinonasal and NPCs who underwent comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations. Twenty patients were evaluated prior to RT, of which eleven received follow-up evaluation after completion of RT. Nineteen patients were evaluated following various treatments without a pre-RT evaluation. Main Outcomes and Measures Patients completed comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations. Decline from pre-RT to follow-up was defined on the basis of reliable change indices. Results Thirty-nine patients completed comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations. For the entire cohort, the most frequently demonstrated impairments were in verbal memory (47%) and learning (43%), executive functioning (33%), and verbal fluency (22%). At post-RT follow-up, the most frequently observed declines were in verbal learning (46%) and memory (18%). Demographic and disease variables were not significantly associated with NCF at pre-RT or post-RT. Conclusion and Relevance Patients with sinonasal and NPCs are at risk for NCF impairments in multiple areas at baseline and memory decline following RT. Future prospective studies are needed to investigate the impact of each treatment modality on NCF and specific risk factors for cognitive dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]