-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
The application of machine learning to imaging in hematological oncology: A scoping review
S. Kotsyfakis, E. Iliaki-Giannakoudaki, A. Anagnostopoulos, E. Papadokostaki, K. Giannakoudakis, M. Goumenakis, M. Kotsyfakis
Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko
Typ dokumentu systematický přehled
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2011
Free Medical Journals
od 2011
PubMed Central
od 2011
Europe PubMed Central
od 2011
Open Access Digital Library
od 2011-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2011-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2011
- Publikační typ
- systematický přehled MeSH
BACKGROUND: Here, we conducted a scoping review to (i) establish which machine learning (ML) methods have been applied to hematological malignancy imaging; (ii) establish how ML is being applied to hematological cancer radiology; and (iii) identify addressable research gaps. METHODS: The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The inclusion criteria were (i) pediatric and adult patients with suspected or confirmed hematological malignancy undergoing imaging (population); (ii) any study using ML techniques to derive models using radiological images to apply to the clinical management of these patients (concept); and (iii) original research articles conducted in any setting globally (context). Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 criteria were used to assess diagnostic and segmentation studies, while the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of observational studies. RESULTS: Of 53 eligible studies, 33 applied diverse ML techniques to diagnose hematological malignancies or to differentiate them from other diseases, especially discriminating gliomas from primary central nervous system lymphomas (n=18); 11 applied ML to segmentation tasks, while 9 applied ML to prognostication or predicting therapeutic responses, especially for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. All studies reported discrimination statistics, but no study calculated calibration statistics. Every diagnostic/segmentation study had a high risk of bias due to their case-control design; many studies failed to provide adequate details of the reference standard; and only a few studies used independent validation. CONCLUSION: To deliver validated ML-based models to radiologists managing hematological malignancies, future studies should (i) adhere to standardized, high-quality reporting guidelines such as the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging; (ii) validate models in independent cohorts; (ii) standardize volume segmentation methods for segmentation tasks; (iv) establish comprehensive prospective studies that include different tumor grades, comparisons with radiologists, optimal imaging modalities, sequences, and planes; (v) include side-by-side comparisons of different methods; and (vi) include low- and middle-income countries in multicentric studies to enhance generalizability and reduce inequity.
'Apollonion' Diagnostic Center Heraklion Greece
Agios Savvas Oncology Hospital of Athens Athens Greece
Biology Center of the Czech Academy of Sciences Budweis Czechia
Diagnostic Center 'Ierapetra Diagnosis' Ierapetra Greece
General Hospital of Heraklion Venizeleio Pananeio Heraklion Greece
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc23003345
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230421100006.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 230413s2022 sz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3389/fonc.2022.1080988 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)36605438
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a sz
- 100 1_
- $a Kotsyfakis, Stylianos $u Diagnostic Center 'Ierapetra Diagnosis', Ierapetra, Greece
- 245 14
- $a The application of machine learning to imaging in hematological oncology: A scoping review / $c S. Kotsyfakis, E. Iliaki-Giannakoudaki, A. Anagnostopoulos, E. Papadokostaki, K. Giannakoudakis, M. Goumenakis, M. Kotsyfakis
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: Here, we conducted a scoping review to (i) establish which machine learning (ML) methods have been applied to hematological malignancy imaging; (ii) establish how ML is being applied to hematological cancer radiology; and (iii) identify addressable research gaps. METHODS: The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The inclusion criteria were (i) pediatric and adult patients with suspected or confirmed hematological malignancy undergoing imaging (population); (ii) any study using ML techniques to derive models using radiological images to apply to the clinical management of these patients (concept); and (iii) original research articles conducted in any setting globally (context). Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 criteria were used to assess diagnostic and segmentation studies, while the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of observational studies. RESULTS: Of 53 eligible studies, 33 applied diverse ML techniques to diagnose hematological malignancies or to differentiate them from other diseases, especially discriminating gliomas from primary central nervous system lymphomas (n=18); 11 applied ML to segmentation tasks, while 9 applied ML to prognostication or predicting therapeutic responses, especially for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. All studies reported discrimination statistics, but no study calculated calibration statistics. Every diagnostic/segmentation study had a high risk of bias due to their case-control design; many studies failed to provide adequate details of the reference standard; and only a few studies used independent validation. CONCLUSION: To deliver validated ML-based models to radiologists managing hematological malignancies, future studies should (i) adhere to standardized, high-quality reporting guidelines such as the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging; (ii) validate models in independent cohorts; (ii) standardize volume segmentation methods for segmentation tasks; (iv) establish comprehensive prospective studies that include different tumor grades, comparisons with radiologists, optimal imaging modalities, sequences, and planes; (v) include side-by-side comparisons of different methods; and (vi) include low- and middle-income countries in multicentric studies to enhance generalizability and reduce inequity.
- 590 __
- $a NEINDEXOVÁNO
- 655 _2
- $a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
- 700 1_
- $a Iliaki-Giannakoudaki, Evangelia $u General Hospital of Heraklion Venizeleio-Pananeio, Heraklion, Greece
- 700 1_
- $a Anagnostopoulos, Antonios $u Agios Savvas Oncology Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece
- 700 1_
- $a Papadokostaki, Eleni $u General Hospital of Heraklion Venizeleio-Pananeio, Heraklion, Greece
- 700 1_
- $a Giannakoudakis, Konstantinos $u General Hospital of Heraklion Venizeleio-Pananeio, Heraklion, Greece
- 700 1_
- $a Goumenakis, Michail $u 'Apollonion' Diagnostic Center, Heraklion, Greece
- 700 1_
- $a Kotsyfakis, Michail $u Biology Center of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Budweis (Ceske Budejovice), Czechia
- 773 0_
- $w MED00182989 $t Frontiers in oncology $x 2234-943X $g Roč. 12, č. - (2022), s. 1080988
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36605438 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20230413 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230421095959 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1922876 $s 1189552
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2022 $b 12 $c - $d 1080988 $e 20221219 $i 2234-943X $m Frontiers in oncology $n Front Oncol $x MED00182989
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20230413