影响项目:改善获得临床试验在维多利亚州,人工智能为基础的方法。

IF 3.3 Q2 ONCOLOGY
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-09 DOI:10.1200/CCI.24.00137
Maria L Bechelli, Kris Ivanova, Suan Siang Tan, Beena Kumar, Dayna Swiatek, Surein Arulananda, Sue M Evans
{"title":"影响项目:改善获得临床试验在维多利亚州,人工智能为基础的方法。","authors":"Maria L Bechelli, Kris Ivanova, Suan Siang Tan, Beena Kumar, Dayna Swiatek, Surein Arulananda, Sue M Evans","doi":"10.1200/CCI.24.00137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Enhancing the speed and efficiency of clinical trial recruitment is a key objective across international health systems. This study aimed to use artificial intelligence (AI) applied in the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR), a population-based cancer registry, to assess (1) if VCR received all relevant pathology reports for three clinical trials, (2) AI accuracy in auto-extracting information from pathology reports for recruitment, and (3) the number of participants approached for trial enrollment using the AI approach compared with standard hospital-based recruitment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To verify pathology report accessibility for VCR trial enrollment, reports from the laboratory were cross-referenced. To determine the accuracy of a Rapid Case Ascertainment (RCA) module of the AI software in extracting key clinical variables from the pathology report, data were compared with manually reviewed reports. To examine the effectiveness of the AI recruitment approach, the number of patients approached for recruitment was compared with standard practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 195 reports provided by the pathology laboratory, 185 (94.9%) were received by VCR, 73 of 195 (37.4%) were eligible for the studies, and 5 of 73 (6.8%) eligible cases had not been received by the VCR. The RCA module demonstrated an accuracy of 93% and an F1 score of 0.94 in extracting key clinical variables. However, the RCA false-positive rate was 10% and the false-negative rate was 5%. The standard hospital approach selected fewer cases for approach to clinical trials compared with the RCA module approach, 8 of 336 (2.4%) versus 12 of 336 (3.6%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using AI to screen potentially eligible cases for recruitment to three clinical trials resulted in a 50% increase in eligible cases being approached for enrollment.</p>","PeriodicalId":51626,"journal":{"name":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","volume":"9 ","pages":"e2400137"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732263/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ImpACT Project: Improving Access to Clinical Trials in Victoria, an Artificial Intelligence-Based Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Maria L Bechelli, Kris Ivanova, Suan Siang Tan, Beena Kumar, Dayna Swiatek, Surein Arulananda, Sue M Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/CCI.24.00137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Enhancing the speed and efficiency of clinical trial recruitment is a key objective across international health systems. This study aimed to use artificial intelligence (AI) applied in the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR), a population-based cancer registry, to assess (1) if VCR received all relevant pathology reports for three clinical trials, (2) AI accuracy in auto-extracting information from pathology reports for recruitment, and (3) the number of participants approached for trial enrollment using the AI approach compared with standard hospital-based recruitment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To verify pathology report accessibility for VCR trial enrollment, reports from the laboratory were cross-referenced. To determine the accuracy of a Rapid Case Ascertainment (RCA) module of the AI software in extracting key clinical variables from the pathology report, data were compared with manually reviewed reports. To examine the effectiveness of the AI recruitment approach, the number of patients approached for recruitment was compared with standard practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 195 reports provided by the pathology laboratory, 185 (94.9%) were received by VCR, 73 of 195 (37.4%) were eligible for the studies, and 5 of 73 (6.8%) eligible cases had not been received by the VCR. The RCA module demonstrated an accuracy of 93% and an F1 score of 0.94 in extracting key clinical variables. However, the RCA false-positive rate was 10% and the false-negative rate was 5%. The standard hospital approach selected fewer cases for approach to clinical trials compared with the RCA module approach, 8 of 336 (2.4%) versus 12 of 336 (3.6%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using AI to screen potentially eligible cases for recruitment to three clinical trials resulted in a 50% increase in eligible cases being approached for enrollment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"e2400137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732263/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.24.00137\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.24.00137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:提高临床试验招募的速度和效率是整个国际卫生系统的一个关键目标。本研究旨在将人工智能(AI)应用于维多利亚癌症登记处(VCR),这是一个基于人群的癌症登记处,以评估(1)VCR是否收到了三个临床试验的所有相关病理报告,(2)人工智能在从病理报告中自动提取招募信息方面的准确性,以及(3)与标准的基于医院的招募相比,使用人工智能方法进行试验招募的参与者数量。方法:为了验证VCR试验入组时病理报告的可及性,交叉引用实验室报告。为了确定AI软件的快速病例确定(RCA)模块从病理报告中提取关键临床变量的准确性,将数据与人工审阅的报告进行比较。为了检验人工智能招募方法的有效性,将招募的患者数量与标准做法进行比较。结果:病理实验室提供的195例报告中,VCR收到185例(94.9%),195例中有73例(37.4%)符合研究条件,73例中有5例(6.8%)未被VCR收到。RCA模块在提取关键临床变量方面的准确率为93%,F1评分为0.94。RCA假阳性率为10%,假阴性率为5%。与RCA模块方法相比,标准医院方法选择临床试验方法的病例较少,336例中有8例(2.4%),336例中有12例(3.6%)。结论:使用人工智能筛选潜在的符合条件的病例,以招募到三个临床试验,可使符合条件的病例增加50%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ImpACT Project: Improving Access to Clinical Trials in Victoria, an Artificial Intelligence-Based Approach.

Purpose: Enhancing the speed and efficiency of clinical trial recruitment is a key objective across international health systems. This study aimed to use artificial intelligence (AI) applied in the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR), a population-based cancer registry, to assess (1) if VCR received all relevant pathology reports for three clinical trials, (2) AI accuracy in auto-extracting information from pathology reports for recruitment, and (3) the number of participants approached for trial enrollment using the AI approach compared with standard hospital-based recruitment.

Methods: To verify pathology report accessibility for VCR trial enrollment, reports from the laboratory were cross-referenced. To determine the accuracy of a Rapid Case Ascertainment (RCA) module of the AI software in extracting key clinical variables from the pathology report, data were compared with manually reviewed reports. To examine the effectiveness of the AI recruitment approach, the number of patients approached for recruitment was compared with standard practice.

Results: Of the 195 reports provided by the pathology laboratory, 185 (94.9%) were received by VCR, 73 of 195 (37.4%) were eligible for the studies, and 5 of 73 (6.8%) eligible cases had not been received by the VCR. The RCA module demonstrated an accuracy of 93% and an F1 score of 0.94 in extracting key clinical variables. However, the RCA false-positive rate was 10% and the false-negative rate was 5%. The standard hospital approach selected fewer cases for approach to clinical trials compared with the RCA module approach, 8 of 336 (2.4%) versus 12 of 336 (3.6%), respectively.

Conclusion: Using AI to screen potentially eligible cases for recruitment to three clinical trials resulted in a 50% increase in eligible cases being approached for enrollment.

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
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
190
×
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