Cargando…
Predicting Rectal Cancer Response to Total Neoadjuvant Treatment Using an Artificial Intelligence Model Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Data
PURPOSE: To develop a model for predicting response to total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) based on baseline magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical data using artificial intelligence methods. METHODS: Baseline MRI and clinical data were cu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338728/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37431270 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338231186467 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: To develop a model for predicting response to total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) based on baseline magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical data using artificial intelligence methods. METHODS: Baseline MRI and clinical data were curated from patients with LARC and analyzed using logistic regression (LR) and deep learning (DL) methods to predict TNT response retrospectively. We defined two groups of response to TNT as pathological complete response (pCR) versus non-pCR (Group 1), and high sensitivity [tumor regression grade (TRG) 0 and TRG 1] versus moderate sensitivity (TRG 2 or patients with TRG 3 and a reduction in tumor volume of at least 20% compared to baseline) versus low sensitivity (TRG 3 and a reduction in tumor volume <20% compared to baseline) (Group 2). We extracted and selected clinical and radiomic features on baseline T2WI. Then we built LR models and DL models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysis was performed to assess predictive performance of models. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were assigned to the training cohort, and 29 patients were assigned to the testing cohort. The area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of LR models, which were predictive of high sensitivity and pCR, were 0.853 and 0.866, respectively. Whereas the AUCs of DL models were 0.829 and 0.838, respectively. After 10 rounds of cross validation, the accuracy of the models in Group 1 is higher than in Group 2. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between LR model and DL model. Artificial Intelligence-based radiomics biomarkers may have potential clinical implications for adaptive and personalized therapy. |
---|