RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Lesion detection is one of the most important clinical tasks in positron emission tomography (PET) for oncology. An anthropomorphic model observer (MO) designed to replicate human observers (HOs) in a detection task is an important tool for assessing task-based image quality. The channelized Hotelling observer (CHO) has been the most popular anthropomorphic MO. Recently, deep learning MOs (DLMOs), mostly based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have been investigated for various imaging modalities. However, there have been few studies on DLMOs for PET. PURPOSE: The goal of the study is to investigate whether DLMOs can predict HOs better than conventional MOs such as CHO in a two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) detection task using PET images with real anatomical variability. METHODS: Two types of DLMOs were implemented: (1) CNN DLMO, and (2) CNN-SwinT DLMO that combines CNN and Swin Transformer (SwinT) encoders. Lesion-absent PET images were reconstructed from clinical data, and lesion-present images were reconstructed with adding simulated lesion sinogram data. Lesion-present and lesion-absent PET image pairs were labeled by eight HOs consisting of four radiologists and four image scientists in a 2AFC detection task. In total, 2268 pairs of lesion-present and lesion-absent images were used for training, 324 pairs for validation, and 324 pairs for test. CNN DLMO, CNN-SwinT DLMO, CHO with internal noise, and non-prewhitening matched filter (NPWMF) were compared in the same train-test paradigm. For comparison, six quantitative metrics including prediction accuracy, mean squared errors (MSEs) and correlation coefficients, which measure how well a MO predicts HOs, were calculated in a 9-fold cross-validation experiment. RESULTS: In terms of the accuracy and MSE metrics, CNN DLMO and CNN-SwinT DLMO showed better performance than CHO and NPWMF, and CNN-SwinT DLMO showed the best performance among the MOs evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: DLMO can predict HOs more accurately than conventional MOs such as CHO in PET lesion detection. Combining SwinT and CNN encoders can improve the DLMO prediction performance compared to using CNN only.
RESUMO
Radiomics, the science of extracting quantifiable data from routine medical images, is a powerful tool that has many potential applications in oncology. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Working Group (RWG) held a workshop in May 2022, which brought together various stakeholders to discuss the potential role of radiomics in oncology drug development and clinical trials, particularly with respect to response assessment. This article summarizes the results of that workshop, reviewing radiomics for the practicing oncologist and highlighting the work that needs to be done to move forward the incorporation of radiomics into clinical trials.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Medicina de Precisão , Humanos , Medicina de Precisão/métodos , Critérios de Avaliação de Resposta em Tumores Sólidos , Radiômica , Oncologia , Neoplasias/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Standard measures of response such as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors are ineffective for bone lesions, often making breast cancer patients that have bone-dominant metastases ineligible for clinical trials with potentially helpful therapies. In this study we prospectively evaluated the test-retest uptake variability of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (18F-FDG) in a cohort of breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases to determine response criteria. The thresholds for 95% specificity of change versus no-change were then applied to a second cohort of breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases. METHODS: For this study, nine patients with 38 bone lesions were imaged with 18F-FDG in the same calibrated scanner twice within 14 days. Tumor uptake was quantified by the most commonly used PET parameter, the maximum tumor voxel normalized by dose and body weight (SUVmax) and also by the mean of a 1-cc maximal uptake volume normalized by dose and lean-body-mass (SULpeak). The asymmetric repeatability coefficients with confidence intervals for SUVmax and SULpeak were used to determine the limits of 18F-FDG uptake variability. A second cohort of 28 breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases that had 146 metastatic bone lesions was imaged with 18F-FDG before and after standard-of-care therapy for response assessment. RESULTS: The mean relative difference of SUVmax and SULpeak in 38 bone tumors of the first cohort were 4.3% and 6.7%. The upper and lower asymmetric limits of the repeatability coefficient were 19.4% and - 16.3% for SUVmax, and 21.2% and - 17.5% for SULpeak. 18F-FDG repeatability coefficient confidence intervals resulted in the following patient stratification using SULpeak for the second patient cohort: 11-progressive disease, 5-stable disease, 7-partial response, and 1-complete response with three inevaluable patients. The asymmetric repeatability coefficients response criteria for SULpeak changed the status of 3 patients compared to the standard Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors of ± 30% SULpeak. CONCLUSION: In evaluating bone tumor response for breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases using 18F-FDG SUVmax, the repeatability coefficients from test-retest studies show that reductions of more than 17% and increases of more than 20% are unlikely to be due to measurement variability. Serial 18F-FDG imaging in clinical trials investigating bone lesions in these patients, such as the ECOG-ACRIN EA1183 trial, benefit from confidence limits that allow interpretation of response.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Standard measures of response such as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors are ineffective for bone lesions, often making breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases ineligible for clinical trials with potentially helpful therapies. In this study we prospectively evaluated the test-retest uptake variability of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (18F-FDG) in a cohort of breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases to determine response criteria. The thresholds for 95% specificity of change versus no-change were then applied to a second cohort of breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases.In this study, nine patients with 38 bone lesions were imaged with 18F-FDG in the same calibrated scanner twice within 14 days. Tumor uptake was quantified as the maximum tumor voxel normalized by dose and body weight (SUVmax) and the mean of a 1-cc maximal uptake volume normalized by dose and lean-body-mass (SULpeak). The asymmetric repeatability coefficients with confidence intervals of SUVmax and SULpeak were used to determine limits of 18F-FDG uptake variability. A second cohort of 28 breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases that had 146 metastatic bone lesions was imaged with 18F-FDG before and after standard-of-care therapy for response assessment. RESULTS: The mean relative difference of SUVmax in 38 bone tumors of the first cohort was 4.3%. The upper and lower asymmetric limits of the repeatability coefficient were 19.4% and -16.3%, respectively. The 18F-FDG repeatability coefficient confidence intervals resulted in the following patient stratification for the second patient cohort: 11-progressive disease, 5-stable disease, 7-partial response, and 1-complete response with three inevaluable patients. The asymmetric repeatability coefficients response criteria changed the status of 3 patients compared to standard the standard Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors of ±30% SULpeak. CONCLUSIONS: In evaluating bone tumor response for breast cancer patients with bone-dominant metastases using 18F-FDG uptake, the repeatability coefficients from test-retest studies show that reductions of more than 17% and increases of more than 20% are unlikely to be due to measurement variability. Serial 18F-FDG imaging in clinical trials investigating bone lesions from these patients, such as the ECOG-ACRIN EA1183 trial, benefit from confidence limits that allow interpretation of response.