Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pain is a challenging multifaceted symptom reported by most cancer patients. This systematic review aims to explore applications of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) in predicting pain-related outcomes and pain management in cancer. METHODS: A comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases was conducted using terms: "Cancer", "Pain", "Pain Management", "Analgesics", "Artificial Intelligence", "Machine Learning", and "Neural Networks" published up to September 7, 2023. AI/ML models, their validation and performance were summarized. Quality assessment was conducted using PROBAST risk-of-bias andadherence to TRIPOD guidelines. RESULTS: Forty four studies from 2006-2023 were included. Nineteen studies used AI/ML for classifying pain after cancer therapy [median AUC 0.80 (range 0.76-0.94)]. Eighteen studies focused on cancer pain research [median AUC 0.86 (range 0.50-0.99)], and 7 focused on applying AI/ML for cancer pain management, [median AUC 0.71 (range 0.47-0.89)]. Median AUC (0.77) of models across all studies. Random forest models demonstrated the highest performance (median AUC 0.81), lasso models had the highest median sensitivity (1), while Support Vector Machine had the highest median specificity (0.74). Overall adherence to TRIPOD guidelines was 70.7%. Overall, high risk-of-bias (77.3%), lack of external validation (14%) and clinical application (23%) was detected. Reporting of model calibration was also missing (5%). CONCLUSION: Implementation of AI/ML tools promises significant advances in the classification, risk stratification, and management decisions for cancer pain. Further research focusing on quality improvement, model calibration, rigorous external clinical validation in real healthcare settings is imperative for ensuring its practical and reliable application in clinical practice.

Artificial Intelligence Uncertainty Quantification in Radiotherapy Applications - A Scoping Review.

Background/purpose: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiotherapy (RT) is expanding rapidly. However, there exists a notable lack of clinician trust in AI models, underscoring the need for effective uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods. The purpose of this study was to scope existing literature related to UQ in RT, identify areas of improvement, and determine future directions. Methods: We followed the PRISMA-ScR scoping review reporting guidelines. We utilized the population (human cancer patients), concept (utilization of AI UQ), context (radiotherapy applications) framework to structure our search and screening process. We conducted a systematic search spanning seven databases, supplemented by manual curation, up to January 2024. Our search yielded a total of 8980 articles for initial review. Manuscript screening and data extraction was performed in Covidence. Data extraction categories included general study characteristics, RT characteristics, AI characteristics, and UQ characteristics. Results: We identified 56 articles published from 2015-2024. 10 domains of RT applications were represented; most studies evaluated auto-contouring (50%), followed by image-synthesis (13%), and multiple applications simultaneously (11%). 12 disease sites were represented, with head and neck cancer being the most common disease site independent of application space (32%). Imaging data was used in 91% of studies, while only 13% incorporated RT dose information. Most studies focused on failure detection as the main application of UQ (60%), with Monte Carlo dropout being the most commonly implemented UQ method (32%) followed by ensembling (16%). 55% of studies did not share code or datasets. Conclusion: Our review revealed a lack of diversity in UQ for RT applications beyond auto-contouring. Moreover, there was a clear need to study additional UQ methods, such as conformal prediction. Our results may incentivize the development of guidelines for reporting and implementation of UQ in RT.

Comparison of Machine Leaning Models for Prediction of Acute Pain Severity and On-Treatment Opioid Utilization in Oral Cavity and Oropharyngeal Cancer Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy: Exploratory Analysis from a Large-Scale Retrospective Cohort.

Background: Acute pain is a common and debilitating symptom experienced by oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer (OC/OPC) patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT). Uncontrolled pain can result in opioid overuse and increased risks of long-term opioid dependence. The specific aim of this exploratory analysis was the prediction of severe acute pain and opioid use in the acute on-treatment setting, to develop risk-stratification models for pragmatic clinical trials. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 900 OC/OPC patients treated with RT during 2017 to 2023. Clinical data including demographics, tumor data, pain scores and medication data were extracted from patient records. On-treatment pain intensity scores were assessed using a numeric rating scale (0-none, 10-worst) and total opioid doses were calculated using morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) conversion factors. Analgesics efficacy was assessed based on the combined pain intensity and the total required MEDD. ML models, including Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), and Gradient Boosting Model (GBM) were developed and validated using ten-fold cross-validation. Performance of models were evaluated using discrimination and calibration metrics. Feature importance was investigated using bootstrap and permutation techniques. Results: For predicting acute pain intensity, the GBM demonstrated superior area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) (0.71), recall (0.39), and F1 score (0.48). For predicting the total MEDD, LR outperformed other models in the AUC (0.67). For predicting the analgesics efficacy, SVM achieved the highest specificity (0.97), and best calibration (ECE of 0.06), while RF and GBM achieved the same highest AUC, 0.68. RF model emerged as the best calibrated model with ECE of 0.02 for pain intensity prediction and 0.05 for MEDD prediction. Baseline pain scores and vital signs demonstrated the most contributed features for the different predictive models. Conclusion: These ML models are promising in predicting end-of-treatment acute pain and opioid requirements and analgesics efficacy in OC/OPC patients undergoing RT. Baseline pain score, vital sign changes were identified as crucial predictors. Implementation of these models in clinical practice could facilitate early risk stratification and personalized pain management. Prospective multicentric studies and external validation are essential for further refinement and generalizability.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cancer Related Pain: A Systematic Review.

Background/objective: Pain is a challenging multifaceted symptom reported by most cancer patients, resulting in a substantial burden on both patients and healthcare systems. This systematic review aims to explore applications of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) in predicting pain-related outcomes and supporting decision-making processes in pain management in cancer. Methods: A comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases was conducted using terms including "Cancer", "Pain", "Pain Management", "Analgesics", "Opioids", "Artificial Intelligence", "Machine Learning", "Deep Learning", and "Neural Networks" published up to September 7, 2023. The screening process was performed using the Covidence screening tool. Only original studies conducted in human cohorts were included. AI/ML models, their validation and performance and adherence to TRIPOD guidelines were summarized from the final included studies. Results: This systematic review included 44 studies from 2006-2023. Most studies were prospective and uni-institutional. There was an increase in the trend of AI/ML studies in cancer pain in the last 4 years. Nineteen studies used AI/ML for classifying cancer patients' pain development after cancer therapy, with median AUC 0.80 (range 0.76-0.94). Eighteen studies focused on cancer pain research with median AUC 0.86 (range 0.50-0.99), and 7 focused on applying AI/ML for cancer pain management decisions with median AUC 0.71 (range 0.47-0.89). Multiple ML models were investigated with. median AUC across all models in all studies (0.77). Random forest models demonstrated the highest performance (median AUC 0.81), lasso models had the highest median sensitivity (1), while Support Vector Machine had the highest median specificity (0.74). Overall adherence of included studies to TRIPOD guidelines was 70.7%. Lack of external validation (14%) and clinical application (23%) of most included studies was detected. Reporting of model calibration was also missing in the majority of studies (5%). Conclusion: Implementation of various novel AI/ML tools promises significant advances in the classification, risk stratification, and management decisions for cancer pain. These advanced tools will integrate big health-related data for personalized pain management in cancer patients. Further research focusing on model calibration and rigorous external clinical validation in real healthcare settings is imperative for ensuring its practical and reliable application in clinical practice.

Comparison of machine learning methods for prediction of osteoradionecrosis incidence in patients with head and neck cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Mandible osteoradionecrosis (ORN) is one of the most severe toxicities in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) undergoing radiotherapy (RT). The existing literature focuses on the correlation of mandible ORN and clinical and dosimetric factors. This study proposes the use of machine learning (ML) methods as prediction models for mandible ORN incidence. METHODS: A total of 96 patients (ORN incidence ratio of 1:1) treated between 2011 and 2015 were selected from the local HNC toxicity database. Demographic, clinical and dosimetric data (based on the mandible dose-volume histogram) were considered as model variables. Prediction accuracy (measured using a stratified fivefold nested cross-validation), sensitivity, specificity, precision and negative predictive value were used to evaluate the prediction performance of a multivariate logistic regression (LR) model, a support vector machine (SVM) model, a random forest (RF) model, an adaptive boosting (AdaBoost) model and an artificial neural network (ANN) model. The different models were compared based on their prediction accuracy and using the McNemar's hypothesis test. RESULTS: The ANN model (77% accuracy), closely followed by the SVM (76%), AdaBoost (75%) and LR (75%) models, showed the highest overall prediction accuracy. The RF model (71%) showed the lowest prediction accuracy. However, based on the McNemar's test applied to all model pair combinations, no statistically significant difference between the models was found. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we encourage the use of ML-based prediction models for ORN incidence as has already been done for other HNC toxicity end points. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This research opens a new path towards personalised RT for HNC using ML to predict mandible ORN incidence.

Dentoalveolar radiation dose following IMRT in oropharyngeal cancer-An observational study.

OBJECTIVES: This observational study aims to determine individual dental doses in oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) patients managed by intensity modulated radiation treatment (IMRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: OPC patients treated with IMRT had each tooth individually contoured on post-IMRT CT scans. The mean, maximum and minimum doses were calculated per tooth-based upon patient and tumor demographics (tumor size and nodal status). RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were included in this study. Escalating tumor size and nodal status led to an observed increase in Dmean doses to the dentition on the contralateral tumor side. A significant region in both jaws received >30 Gy in this tumor group. CONCLUSION: Tumor demographics were observed to influence RT doses to the dentition and need to be considered when providing a pre-RT dental assessment. The observed dose of >30 Gy in large spans of the dentition and jaws highlights future risk of dental deterioration and ORN with long term survival.

Analyzing oropharyngeal cancer survival outcomes: a decision tree approach.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze survival outcomes in patients with oropharygeal cancer treated with primary intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using decision tree algorithms. METHODS: A total of 273 patients with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal cancer were identified between March 2010 and December 2016. The data set contained nine predictor variables and a dependent variable (overall survival (OS) status). The open-source R software was used. Survival outcomes were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Important explanatory variables were selected using the random forest approach. A classification tree that optimally partitioned patients with different OS rates was then built. RESULTS: The 5 year OS for the entire population was 78.1%. The top three important variables identified were HPV status, N stage and early complete response to treatment. Patients were partitioned in five groups on the basis of these explanatory variables. CONCLUSION: The proposed classification tree could help to guide future research in oropharyngeal cancer field. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Decision tree method seems to be an appropriate tool to partition oropharyngeal cancer patients.

Mathematical modelling of tumour volume dynamics in response to stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer.

This paper reports a modelling study of tumour volume dynamics in response to stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). The main objective was to develop a model that is adequate to describe tumour volume change measured during SABR, and at the same time is not excessively complex as lacking support from clinical data. To this end, various modelling options were explored, and a rigorous statistical method, the Akaike information criterion, was used to help determine a trade-off between model accuracy and complexity. The models were calibrated to the data from 11 non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with SABR. The results showed that it is feasible to model the tumour volume dynamics during SABR, opening up the potential for using such models in a clinical environment in the future.