Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34888189›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2021

Exploratory ensemble interpretable model for predicting local failure in head and neck cancer: the additive benefit of CT and intra-treatment cone-beam computed tomography features.

Howard E Morgan, Kai Wang, Michael Dohopolski, Xiao Liang, Michael R Folkert, David J Sher, Jing Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Artificial Intelligence in Head and Neck Surgery.Otolaryngologic clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Current Role of Delta Radiomics in Head and Neck Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Howard E MorganDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Kai WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Michael DohopolskiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Xiao LiangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Michael R FolkertDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
David J SherDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Jing WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLocal failure (LF) following chemoradiation (CRT) for head and neck cancer is associated with poor overall survival. If machine learning techniques could stratify patients at risk of treatment failure based on baseline and intra-treatment imaging, such a model could facilitate response-adapted approaches to escalate, de-escalate, or switch therapy.

methodsA 1:2 retrospective case control cohort of patients treated at a single institution with definitive radiotherapy for head and neck cancer who failed locally, in-field at a primary or nodal structure were included. Radiomic features were extracted from baseline CT and CBCT scans at fractions 1 and 21 (delta) of radiotherapy with PyRadiomics and were selected for by: reproducibility (intra-class correlation coefficients ≥0.95), redundancy [maximum relevance and minimum redundancy (mRMR)], and informativeness [recursive feature elimination (RFE)]. Separate models predicting LF of primaries or nodes were created using the explainable boosting machine (EBM) classifier with 5-fold cross-validation for (I) clinical only, (II) radiomic only (CT1 and delta features), and (III) fused models (clinical + radiomic). Twenty-five iterations were performed, and predicted scores were averaged with a parallel ensemble design. Receiver operating characteristic curves were compared between models with paired-samples

resultsThe fused ensemble model for primaries (using clinical, CT1, and delta features) achieved an AUC of 0.871 with a sensitivity of 78.3% and specificity of 90.9% at the maximum Youden J statistic. The fused ensemble model trended towards improvement when compared to the clinical only ensemble model (AUC =0.788, P=0.134) but reached significance when compared to the radiomic ensemble model (AUC =0.770, P=0.017). The fused ensemble model for nodes achieved an AUC of 0.910 with a sensitivity of 100.0% and specificity of 68.0%, which also trended towards improvement when compared to the clinical model (AUC =0.865, P=0.080).

conclusionsThe fused ensemble EBM model achieved high discriminatory ability at predicting LF for head and neck cancer in independent primary and nodal structures. Although an additive benefit of delta radiomics over clinical factors could not be proven, the results trended towards improvement with the fused ensemble model, which are promising and worthy of prospective investigation in a larger cohort.

Indexed as

Delta radiomicsensemble learninghead and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC)

Identifiers

PMID34888189
PMCPMC8611459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.