AI-derived body composition parameters as prognostic factors in patients with HCC undergoing TACE in a multicenter study.

Background & Aims: Body composition assessment (BCA) parameters have recently been identified as relevant prognostic factors for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Herein, we aimed to investigate the role of BCA parameters for prognosis prediction in patients with HCC undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Methods: This retrospective multicenter study included a total of 754 treatment-naïve patients with HCC who underwent TACE at six tertiary care centers between 2010-2020. Fully automated artificial intelligence-based quantitative 3D volumetry of abdominal cavity tissue composition was performed to assess skeletal muscle volume (SM), total adipose tissue (TAT), intra- and intermuscular adipose tissue, visceral adipose tissue, and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) on pre-intervention computed tomography scans. BCA parameters were normalized to the slice number of the abdominal cavity. We assessed the influence of BCA parameters on median overall survival and performed multivariate analysis including established estimates of survival. Results: Univariate survival analysis revealed that impaired median overall survival was predicted by low SM (p <0.001), high TAT volume (p = 0.013), and high SAT volume (p = 0.006). In multivariate survival analysis, SM remained an independent prognostic factor (p = 0.039), while TAT and SAT volumes no longer showed predictive ability. This predictive role of SM was confirmed in a subgroup analysis of patients with BCLC stage B. Conclusions: SM is an independent prognostic factor for survival prediction. Thus, the integration of SM into novel scoring systems could potentially improve survival prediction and clinical decision-making. Fully automated approaches are needed to foster the implementation of this imaging biomarker into daily routine. Impact and implications: Body composition assessment parameters, especially skeletal muscle volume, have been identified as relevant prognostic factors for many diseases and treatments. In this study, skeletal muscle volume has been identified as an independent prognostic factor for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transarterial chemoembolization. Therefore, skeletal muscle volume as a metaparameter could play a role as an opportunistic biomarker in holistic patient assessment and be integrated into decision support systems. Workflow integration with artificial intelligence is essential for automated, quantitative body composition assessment, enabling broad availability in multidisciplinary case discussions.

ChatGPT yields low accuracy in determining LI-RADS scores based on free-text and structured radiology reports in German language.

Background: To investigate the feasibility of the large language model (LLM) ChatGPT for classifying liver lesions according to the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) based on MRI reports, and to compare classification performance on structured vs. unstructured reports. Methods: LI-RADS classifiable liver lesions were included from German written structured and unstructured MRI reports with report of size, location, and arterial phase contrast enhancement as minimum inclusion requirements. The findings sections of the reports were propagated to ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), which was instructed to determine LI-RADS scores for each classifiable liver lesion. Ground truth was established by two radiologists in consensus. Agreement between ground truth and ChatGPT was assessed with Cohen's kappa. Test-retest reliability was assessed by passing a subset of n = 50 lesions five times to ChatGPT, using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: 205 MRIs from 150 patients were included. The accuracy of ChatGPT at determining LI-RADS categories was poor (53% and 44% on unstructured and structured reports). The agreement to the ground truth was higher (k = 0.51 and k = 0.44), the mean absolute error in LI-RADS scores was lower (0.5 ± 0.5 vs. 0.6 ± 0.7, p < 0.05), and the test-retest reliability was higher (ICC = 0.81 vs. 0.50), in free-text compared to structured reports, respectively, although structured reports comprised the minimum required imaging features significantly more frequently (Chi-square test, p < 0.05). Conclusions: ChatGPT attained only low accuracy when asked to determine LI-RADS scores from liver imaging reports. The superior accuracy and consistency throughout free-text reports might relate to ChatGPT's training process. Clinical relevance statement: Our study indicates both the necessity of optimization of LLMs for structured clinical data input and the potential of LLMs for creating machine-readable labels based on large free-text radiological databases.

Comparison of 96-kV and 120-kV cone-beam CT for the assessment of cochlear implants.

BACKGROUND: To compare the diagnostic value of 120-kV with conventional 96-kV Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) of the temporal bone after cochlear implant (CI) surgery. METHODS: This retrospective study included CBCT scans after CI surgery between 06/17 and 01/18. CBCT allowed examinations with 96-kV or 120-kV; other parameters were the same. Two radiologists independently evaluated following criteria on 5-point Likert scales: osseous spiral lamina, inner and outer cochlear wall, semi-circular canals, mastoid trabecular structure, overall image quality, metal and motion artefacts, depiction of intracochlear electrode position and visualisation of single electrode contacts. Effective radiation dose was assessed. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients (females, n = 39 [52.0%], mean age, 55.8 ± 16.5 years) were scanned with 96-kV (n = 32, 42.7%) and 120-kV (n = 43, 57.3%) protocols including CI models from three vendors (vendor A n = 7; vendor B n = 43; vendor C n = 25). Overall image quality, depiction of anatomical structures, and electrode position were rated significantly better in 120-kV images compared to 96-kV (all p < = 0.018). Anatomical structures and electrode position were rated significantly better in 120-kV CBCT for CI models from vendor A and C, while 120-kV did not provide improved image quality in CI models from vendor B. Radiation doses were significantly higher for 120-kV scans compared to 96-kV (0.15 vs. 0.08 mSv, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: 120-kV and 96-kV CBCT provide good diagnostic images for the postoperative CI evaluation. While 120-kV showed improved depiction of temporal bone and CI electrode position compared to 96-kV in most CI models, the 120-kV protocol should be chosen wisely due to a substantially higher radiation exposure.

[Ethics and artificial intelligence]. / Ethik und künstliche Intelligenz.

The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) into radiology promises to enhance efficiency and improve diagnostic accuracy, yet it also raises manifold ethical questions. These include data protection issues, the future role of radiologists, liability when using AI systems, and the avoidance of bias. To prevent data bias, the datasets need to be compiled carefully and to be representative of the target population. Accordingly, the upcoming European Union AI act sets particularly high requirements for the datasets used in training medical AI systems. Cognitive bias occurs when radiologists place too much trust in the results provided by AI systems (overreliance). So far, diagnostic AI systems are used almost exclusively as "second look" systems. If diagnostic AI systems are to be used in the future as "first look" systems or even as autonomous AI systems in order to enhance efficiency in radiology, the question of liability needs to be addressed, comparable to liability for autonomous driving. Such use of AI would also significantly change the role of radiologists.

LIONS PREY: A New Logistic Scoring System for the Prediction of Malignant Pulmonary Nodules.

OBJECTIVES: Classifying radiologic pulmonary lesions as malignant is challenging. Scoring systems like the Mayo model lack precision in predicting the probability of malignancy. We developed the logistic scoring system 'LIONS PREY' (Lung lesION Score PREdicts malignancY), which is superior to existing models in its precision in determining the likelihood of malignancy. METHODS: We evaluated all patients that were presented to our multidisciplinary team between January 2013 and December 2020. Availability of pathological results after resection or CT-/EBUS-guided sampling was mandatory for study inclusion. Two groups were formed: Group A (malignant nodule; n = 238) and Group B (benign nodule; n = 148). Initially, 22 potential score parameters were derived from the patients' medical histories. RESULTS: After uni- and multivariate analysis, we identified the following eight parameters that were integrated into a scoring system: (1) age (Group A: 64.5 ± 10.2 years vs. Group B: 61.6 ± 13.8 years; multivariate p-value: 0.054); (2) nodule size (21.8 ± 7.5 mm vs. 18.3 ± 7.9 mm; p = 0.051); (3) spiculation (73.1% vs. 41.9%; p = 0.024); (4) solidity (84.9% vs. 62.8%; p = 0.004); (5) size dynamics (6.4 ± 7.7 mm/3 months vs. 0.2 ± 0.9 mm/3 months; p < 0.0001); (6) smoking history (92.0% vs. 43.9%; p < 0.0001); (7) pack years (35.1 ± 19.1 vs. 21.3 ± 18.8; p = 0.079); and (8) cancer history (34.9% vs. 24.3%; p = 0.052). Our model demonstrated superior precision to that of the Mayo score (p = 0.013) with an overall correct classification of 96.0%, a calibration (observed/expected-ratio) of 1.1, and a discrimination (ROC analysis) of AUC (95% CI) 0.94 (0.92-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on essential parameters, LIONS PREY can be easily and reproducibly applied based on computed tomography (CT) scans. Multidisciplinary team members could use it to facilitate decision making. Patients may find it easier to consent to surgery knowing the likelihood of pulmonary malignancy. The LIONS PREY app is available for free on Android and iOS devices.

Correlation of primary tumor volume and histopathologic response following neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: In esophageal cancer, histopathologic response following neoadjuvant therapy and transthoracic esophagectomy is a strong predictor of long-term survival. At the present, it is not known whether the initial tumor volume quantified by computed tomography (CT) correlates with the degree of pathologic regression. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of a consecutive patient cohort with esophageal adenocarcinoma, tumor volume in CT prior to chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy alone was quantified using manual segmentation. Primary tumor volume was correlated to the histomorphological regression based on vital residual tumor cells (VRTC) (Cologne regression scale, CRS: grade I, >50% VRTC; grade II, 10-50% VRTC; grade III, <10% VRTC and grade IV, complete response without VRTC). RESULTS: A total of 287 patients, 165 with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to the CROSS protocol and 122 with chemotherapy according to the FLOT regimen, were included. The initial tumor volume for patients following CROSS and FLOT therapy was measured (CROSS: median 24.8 ml, IQR 13.1-41.1 ml, FLOT: 23.4 ml, IQR 10.6-37.3 ml). All patients underwent an Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. 180 patients (62.7 %) were classified as minor (CRS I/II) and 107 patients (37.3 %) as major or complete responder (CRS III/IV). The median tumor volume was calculated as 24.2 ml (IQR 11.9-40.3 ml). Ordered logistic regression revealed no significant dependence of CRS from tumor volume (OR = 0.99, p-value = 0.99) irrespective of the type of multimodal treatment. CONCLUSION: The initial tumor volume on diagnostic CT does not aid to differentiate between potential histopathological responders and non-responders to neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal cancer patients. The results emphasize the need to establish other biological markers of prediction.

CT-guided High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy versus Transarterial Chemoembolization in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background CT-guided high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (hereafter, HDR brachytherapy) has been shown to be safe and effective for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but studies comparing this therapy with other local-regional therapies are scarce. Purpose To compare patient outcomes of HDR brachytherapy and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with unresectable HCC. Materials and Methods This multi-institutional retrospective study included consecutive treatment-naive adult patients with unresectable HCC who underwent either HDR brachytherapy or TACE between January 2010 and December 2022. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between patients matched for clinical and tumor characteristics by propensity score matching. Not all patients who underwent TACE had PFS available; thus, a different set of patients was used for PFS and OS analysis for this treatment. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated from Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Results After propensity matching, 150 patients who underwent HDR brachytherapy (median age, 71 years [IQR, 63-77 years]; 117 males) and 150 patients who underwent TACE (OS analysis median age, 70 years [IQR, 63-77 years]; 119 male; PFS analysis median age, 68 years [IQR: 63-76 years]; 119 male) were analyzed. Hazard of death was higher in the TACE versus HDR brachytherapy group (HR, 4.04; P < .001). Median estimated PFS was 32.8 months (95% CI: 12.5, 58.7) in the HDR brachytherapy group and 11.6 months (95% CI: 4.9, 22.7) in the TACE group. Hazard of disease progression was higher in the TACE versus HDR brachytherapy group (HR, 2.23; P < .001). Conclusion In selected treatment-naive patients with unresectable HCC, treatment with CT-guided HDR brachytherapy led to improved OS and PFS compared with TACE. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Chapiro in this issue.

METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS): a quality scoring tool for radiomics research endorsed by EuSoMII.

PURPOSE: To propose a new quality scoring tool, METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), to assess and improve research quality of radiomics studies. METHODS: We conducted an online modified Delphi study with a group of international experts. It was performed in three consecutive stages: Stage#1, item preparation; Stage#2, panel discussion among EuSoMII Auditing Group members to identify the items to be voted; and Stage#3, four rounds of the modified Delphi exercise by panelists to determine the items eligible for the METRICS and their weights. The consensus threshold was 75%. Based on the median ranks derived from expert panel opinion and their rank-sum based conversion to importance scores, the category and item weights were calculated. RESULT: In total, 59 panelists from 19 countries participated in selection and ranking of the items and categories. Final METRICS tool included 30 items within 9 categories. According to their weights, the categories were in descending order of importance: study design, imaging data, image processing and feature extraction, metrics and comparison, testing, feature processing, preparation for modeling, segmentation, and open science. A web application and a repository were developed to streamline the calculation of the METRICS score and to collect feedback from the radiomics community. CONCLUSION: In this work, we developed a scoring tool for assessing the methodological quality of the radiomics research, with a large international panel and a modified Delphi protocol. With its conditional format to cover methodological variations, it provides a well-constructed framework for the key methodological concepts to assess the quality of radiomic research papers. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A quality assessment tool, METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), is made available by a large group of international domain experts, with transparent methodology, aiming at evaluating and improving research quality in radiomics and machine learning. KEY POINTS: • A methodological scoring tool, METRICS, was developed for assessing the quality of radiomics research, with a large international expert panel and a modified Delphi protocol. • The proposed scoring tool presents expert opinion-based importance weights of categories and items with a transparent methodology for the first time. • METRICS accounts for varying use cases, from handcrafted radiomics to entirely deep learning-based pipelines. • A web application has been developed to help with the calculation of the METRICS score ( https://metricsscore.github.io/metrics/METRICS.html ) and a repository created to collect feedback from the radiomics community ( https://github.com/metricsscore/metrics ).

Developing, purchasing, implementing and monitoring AI tools in radiology: Practical considerations. A multi-society statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR & RSNA.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the potential to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever-growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones. This multi-society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.

Developing, Purchasing, Implementing and Monitoring AI Tools in Radiology: Practical Considerations. A Multi-Society Statement From the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR & RSNA.

Artificial intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the potential to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever-growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones. This multi-society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools. KEY POINTS.