Tareco Bucho Teresa M, Petrychenko Liliana, Abdelatty Mohamed A, Bogveradze Nino, Bodalal Zuhir, Beets-Tan Regina G H, Trebeschi Stefano
Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Eur J Radiol Open. 2024 Apr 17;12:100562. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2024.100562. eCollection 2024 Jun.
The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) aims to provide a standardized approach to assess treatment response in solid tumors. However, discrepancies in the selection of measurable and target lesions among radiologists using these criteria pose a significant limitation to their reproducibility and accuracy. This study aimed to understand the factors contributing to this variability.
Machine learning models were used to replicate, in parallel, the selection process of measurable and target lesions by two radiologists in a cohort of 40 patients from an internal pan-cancer dataset. The models were trained on lesion characteristics such as size, shape, texture, rank, and proximity to other lesions. Ablation experiments were conducted to evaluate the impact of lesion diameter, volume, and rank on the selection process.
The models successfully reproduced the selection of measurable lesions, relying primarily on size-related features. Similarly, the models reproduced target lesion selection, relying mostly on lesion rank. Beyond these features, the importance placed by different radiologists on different visual characteristics can vary, specifically when choosing target lesions. Worth noting that substantial variability was still observed between radiologists in both measurable and target lesion selection.
Despite the successful replication of lesion selection, our results still revealed significant inter-radiologist disagreement. This underscores the necessity for more precise guidelines to standardize lesion selection processes and minimize reliance on individual interpretation and experience as a means to bridge existing ambiguities.
实体瘤疗效评价标准(RECIST)旨在提供一种标准化方法来评估实体瘤的治疗反应。然而,放射科医生在使用这些标准时,在可测量病灶和靶病灶的选择上存在差异,这对其可重复性和准确性构成了重大限制。本研究旨在了解导致这种变异性的因素。
使用机器学习模型并行复制两名放射科医生在一个来自内部泛癌数据集的40例患者队列中选择可测量病灶和靶病灶的过程。模型根据病灶特征(如大小、形状、纹理、排名以及与其他病灶的接近程度)进行训练。进行消融实验以评估病灶直径、体积和排名对选择过程的影响。
模型成功复制了可测量病灶的选择,主要依赖于与大小相关的特征。同样,模型也复制了靶病灶的选择,主要依赖于病灶排名。除了这些特征外,不同放射科医生对不同视觉特征的重视程度可能不同,特别是在选择靶病灶时。值得注意的是,在可测量病灶和靶病灶的选择上,放射科医生之间仍存在很大差异。
尽管成功复制了病灶选择,但我们的结果仍显示放射科医生之间存在显著分歧。这凸显了制定更精确指南以规范病灶选择过程并尽量减少对个人解读和经验的依赖的必要性,以此来弥合现有模糊之处。