Purpose

To develop a method of biologically guided deep learning for post-radiation ¹⁸FDG-PET image outcome prediction based on pre-radiation images and radiotherapy dose information.

Methods

Based on the classic reaction-diffusion mechanism, a novel biological model was proposed using a partial differential equation that incorporates spatial radiation dose distribution as a patient-specific treatment information variable. A 7-layer encoder-decoder-based convolutional neural network (CNN) was designed and trained to learn the proposed biological model. As such, the model could generate post-radiation ¹⁸FDG-PET image outcome predictions with breakdown biological components for enhanced explainability. The proposed method was developed using 64 oropharyngeal patients with paired ¹⁸FDG-PET studies before and after 20-Gy delivery (2 Gy/day fraction) by intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). In a two-branch deep learning execution, the proposed CNN learns specific terms in the biological model from paired ¹⁸FDG-PET images and spatial dose distribution in one branch, and the biological model generates post-20-Gy ¹⁸FDG-PET image prediction in the other branch. As in 2D execution, 718/233/230 axial slices from 38/13/13 patients were used for training/validation/independent test. The prediction image results in test cases were compared with the ground-truth results quantitatively.

Results

The proposed method successfully generated post-20-Gy ¹⁸FDG-PET image outcome prediction with breakdown illustrations of biological model components. Standardized uptake value (SUV) mean values in ¹⁸FDG high-uptake regions of predicted images (2.45 ± 0.25) were similar to ground-truth results (2.51 ± 0.33). In 2D-based Gamma analysis, the median/mean Gamma Index (<1) passing rate of test images was 96.5%/92.8% using the 5%/5 mm criterion; such result was improved to 99.9%/99.6% when 10%/10 mm was adopted.

Conclusion

The developed biologically guided deep learning method achieved post-20-Gy ¹⁸FDG-PET image outcome predictions in good agreement with ground-truth results. With the breakdown biological modeling components, the outcome image predictions could be used in adaptive radiotherapy decision-making to optimize personalized plans for the best outcome in the future.

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have resulted in significant enthusiasm for their promise in healthcare. Despite this, prospective randomized controlled trials and successful clinical implementation remain limited. One clinical application of ML is mitigation of the increased risk for acute care during outpatient cancer therapy. We previously reported the results of the System for High Intensity EvaLuation During Radiation Therapy (SHIELD-RT) study (NCT04277650), which was a prospective, randomized quality improvement study demonstrating that ML based on electronic health record (EHR) data can direct supplemental clinical evaluations and reduce the rate of acute care during cancer radiotherapy with and without chemotherapy. The objective of this study is to report the workflow and operational challenges encountered during ML implementation on the SHIELD-RT study.

Results

Data extraction and manual review steps in the workflow represented significant time commitments for implementation of clinical ML on a prospective, randomized study. Barriers include limited data availability through the standard clinical workflow and commercial products, the need to aggregate data from multiple sources, and logistical challenges from altering the standard clinical workflow to deliver adaptive care.

Conclusions

The SHIELD-RT study was an early randomized controlled study which enabled assessment of barriers to clinical ML implementation, specifically those which leverage the EHR. These challenges build on a growing body of literature and may provide lessons for future healthcare ML adoption.

Trial registration

NCT04277650. Registered 20 February 2020. Retrospectively registered quality improvement study.

Objectives

Clinical artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) face barriers related to implementation and trust. There have been few prospective opportunities to evaluate these concerns. System for High Intensity EvaLuation During Radiotherapy (NCT03775265) was a randomised controlled study demonstrating that ML accurately directed clinical evaluations to reduce acute care during cancer radiotherapy. We characterised subsequent perceptions and barriers to implementation.

Methods

An anonymous 7-question Likert-type scale survey with optional free text was administered to multidisciplinary staff focused on workflow, agreement with ML and patient experience.

Results

59/71 (83%) responded. 81% disagreed/strongly disagreed their workflow was disrupted. 67% agreed/strongly agreed patients undergoing intervention were high risk. 75% agreed/strongly agreed they would implement the ML approach routinely if the study was positive. Free-text feedback focused on patient education and ML predictions.

Conclusions

Randomised data and firsthand experience support positive reception of clinical ML. Providers highlighted future priorities, including patient counselling and workflow optimisation.

Purpose

Patients undergoing outpatient radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT) frequently require acute care (emergency department evaluation or hospitalization). Machine learning (ML) may guide interventions to reduce this risk. There are limited prospective studies investigating the clinical impact of ML in health care. The objective of this study was to determine whether ML can identify high-risk patients and direct mandatory twice-weekly clinical evaluation to reduce acute care visits during treatment.

Patients and methods

During this single-institution randomized quality improvement study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04277650), 963 outpatient adult courses of RT and CRT started from January 7 to June 30, 2019, were evaluated by an ML algorithm. Among these, 311 courses identified by ML as high risk (> 10% risk of acute care during treatment) were randomized to standard once-weekly clinical evaluation (n = 157) or mandatory twice-weekly evaluation (n = 154). Both arms allowed additional evaluations on the basis of clinician discretion. The primary end point was the rate of acute care visits during RT. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) and decile calibration plots.

Results

Twice-weekly evaluation reduced rates of acute care during treatment from 22.3% to 12.3% (difference, -10.0%; 95% CI, -18.3 to -1.6; relative risk, 0.556; 95% CI, 0.332 to 0.924; P = .02). Low-risk patients had a 2.7% acute care rate. Model discrimination was good in high- and low-risk patients undergoing standard once-weekly evaluation (AUC, 0.851).

Conclusion

In this prospective randomized study, ML accurately triaged patients undergoing RT and CRT, directing clinical management with reduced acute care rates versus standard of care. This prospective study demonstrates the potential benefit of ML in health care and offers opportunities to enhance care quality and reduce health care costs.

The availability of high-fidelity animal models for oncology research has grown enormously in recent years, enabling preclinical studies relevant to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer to be undertaken. This has led to increased opportunities to conduct co-clinical trials, which are studies on patients that are carried out parallel to or sequentially with animal models of cancer that mirror the biology of the patients' tumors. Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) and genetically engineered mouse models (GEMM) are considered to be the models that best represent human disease and have high translational value. Notably, one element of co-clinical trials that still needs significant optimization is quantitative imaging. The National Cancer Institute has organized a Co-Clinical Imaging Resource Program (CIRP) network to establish best practices for co-clinical imaging and to optimize translational quantitative imaging methodologies. This overview describes the ten co-clinical trials of investigators from eleven institutions who are currently supported by the CIRP initiative and are members of the Animal Models and Co-clinical Trials (AMCT) Working Group. Each team describes their corresponding clinical trial, type of cancer targeted, rationale for choice of animal models, therapy, and imaging modalities. The strengths and weaknesses of the co-clinical trial design and the challenges encountered are considered. The rich research resources generated by the members of the AMCT Working Group will benefit the broad research community and improve the quality and translational impact of imaging in co-clinical trials.