通过机器学习再现 RECIST 病灶选择:透视放射医师内部和医师之间的差异

IF 1.8 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Teresa M. Tareco Bucho , Liliana Petrychenko , Mohamed A. Abdelatty , Nino Bogveradze , Zuhir Bodalal , Regina G.H. Beets-Tan , Stefano Trebeschi
{"title":"通过机器学习再现 RECIST 病灶选择:透视放射医师内部和医师之间的差异","authors":"Teresa M. Tareco Bucho ,&nbsp;Liliana Petrychenko ,&nbsp;Mohamed A. Abdelatty ,&nbsp;Nino Bogveradze ,&nbsp;Zuhir Bodalal ,&nbsp;Regina G.H. Beets-Tan ,&nbsp;Stefano Trebeschi","doi":"10.1016/j.ejro.2024.100562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) aims to provide a standardized approach to assess treatment response in solid tumors. However, discrepancies in the selection of measurable and target lesions among radiologists using these criteria pose a significant limitation to their reproducibility and accuracy. This study aimed to understand the factors contributing to this variability.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Machine learning models were used to replicate, in parallel, the selection process of measurable and target lesions by two radiologists in a cohort of 40 patients from an internal pan-cancer dataset. The models were trained on lesion characteristics such as size, shape, texture, rank, and proximity to other lesions. Ablation experiments were conducted to evaluate the impact of lesion diameter, volume, and rank on the selection process.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The models successfully reproduced the selection of measurable lesions, relying primarily on size-related features. Similarly, the models reproduced target lesion selection, relying mostly on lesion rank. Beyond these features, the importance placed by different radiologists on different visual characteristics can vary, specifically when choosing target lesions. Worth noting that substantial variability was still observed between radiologists in both measurable and target lesion selection.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Despite the successful replication of lesion selection, our results still revealed significant inter-radiologist disagreement. This underscores the necessity for more precise guidelines to standardize lesion selection processes and minimize reliance on individual interpretation and experience as a means to bridge existing ambiguities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38076,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047724000170/pdfft?md5=af783b599123985e9f85386304718a03&pid=1-s2.0-S2352047724000170-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reproducing RECIST lesion selection via machine learning: Insights into intra and inter-radiologist variation\",\"authors\":\"Teresa M. Tareco Bucho ,&nbsp;Liliana Petrychenko ,&nbsp;Mohamed A. Abdelatty ,&nbsp;Nino Bogveradze ,&nbsp;Zuhir Bodalal ,&nbsp;Regina G.H. Beets-Tan ,&nbsp;Stefano Trebeschi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejro.2024.100562\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) aims to provide a standardized approach to assess treatment response in solid tumors. However, discrepancies in the selection of measurable and target lesions among radiologists using these criteria pose a significant limitation to their reproducibility and accuracy. This study aimed to understand the factors contributing to this variability.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Machine learning models were used to replicate, in parallel, the selection process of measurable and target lesions by two radiologists in a cohort of 40 patients from an internal pan-cancer dataset. The models were trained on lesion characteristics such as size, shape, texture, rank, and proximity to other lesions. Ablation experiments were conducted to evaluate the impact of lesion diameter, volume, and rank on the selection process.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The models successfully reproduced the selection of measurable lesions, relying primarily on size-related features. Similarly, the models reproduced target lesion selection, relying mostly on lesion rank. Beyond these features, the importance placed by different radiologists on different visual characteristics can vary, specifically when choosing target lesions. Worth noting that substantial variability was still observed between radiologists in both measurable and target lesion selection.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Despite the successful replication of lesion selection, our results still revealed significant inter-radiologist disagreement. This underscores the necessity for more precise guidelines to standardize lesion selection processes and minimize reliance on individual interpretation and experience as a means to bridge existing ambiguities.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Radiology Open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047724000170/pdfft?md5=af783b599123985e9f85386304718a03&pid=1-s2.0-S2352047724000170-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Radiology Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047724000170\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047724000170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景实体瘤反应评估标准(RECIST)旨在提供一种评估实体瘤治疗反应的标准化方法。然而,放射科医生在使用这些标准选择可测量病灶和靶病灶时存在差异,严重限制了这些标准的可重复性和准确性。本研究旨在了解造成这种差异的因素。方法使用机器学习模型平行复制两位放射科医生从内部泛癌症数据集中的 40 位患者中选择可测量病灶和靶病灶的过程。这些模型是根据病灶特征(如大小、形状、纹理、等级以及与其他病灶的接近程度)进行训练的。进行了消融实验,以评估病灶直径、体积和等级对选择过程的影响。结果模型成功地再现了对可测量病灶的选择,主要依赖于与大小相关的特征。同样,模型重现了目标病变的选择,主要依赖于病变的等级。除了这些特征外,不同放射科医生对不同视觉特征的重视程度也会有所不同,特别是在选择目标病灶时。值得注意的是,在可测量病灶和目标病灶的选择上,放射科医生之间仍然存在很大的差异。这突出表明,有必要制定更精确的指南来规范病灶选择过程,并尽量减少对个人解释和经验的依赖,以此来消除现有的模糊性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reproducing RECIST lesion selection via machine learning: Insights into intra and inter-radiologist variation

Background

The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) aims to provide a standardized approach to assess treatment response in solid tumors. However, discrepancies in the selection of measurable and target lesions among radiologists using these criteria pose a significant limitation to their reproducibility and accuracy. This study aimed to understand the factors contributing to this variability.

Methods

Machine learning models were used to replicate, in parallel, the selection process of measurable and target lesions by two radiologists in a cohort of 40 patients from an internal pan-cancer dataset. The models were trained on lesion characteristics such as size, shape, texture, rank, and proximity to other lesions. Ablation experiments were conducted to evaluate the impact of lesion diameter, volume, and rank on the selection process.

Results

The models successfully reproduced the selection of measurable lesions, relying primarily on size-related features. Similarly, the models reproduced target lesion selection, relying mostly on lesion rank. Beyond these features, the importance placed by different radiologists on different visual characteristics can vary, specifically when choosing target lesions. Worth noting that substantial variability was still observed between radiologists in both measurable and target lesion selection.

Conclusions

Despite the successful replication of lesion selection, our results still revealed significant inter-radiologist disagreement. This underscores the necessity for more precise guidelines to standardize lesion selection processes and minimize reliance on individual interpretation and experience as a means to bridge existing ambiguities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Radiology Open
European Journal of Radiology Open Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
51 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信