Deep learning-based detection and quantification of brain metastases on black-blood imaging can provide treatment suggestions: a clinical cohort study.

objectivesWe aimed to evaluate whether deep learning-based detection and quantification of brain metastasis (BM) may suggest treatment options for patients with BMs.

methodsThe deep learning system (DLS) for detection and quantification of BM was developed in 193 patients and applied to 112 patients that were newly detected on black-blood contrast-enhanced T1-weighted imaging. Patients were assigned to one of 3 treatment suggestion groups according to the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO)-European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommendations using number and volume of the BMs detected by the DLS: short-term imaging follow-up without treatment (group A), surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery (limited BM, group B), or whole-brain radiotherapy or systemic chemotherapy (extensive BM, group C). The concordance between the DLS-based groups and clinical decisions was analyzed with or without consideration of targeted agents. The performance of distinguishing high-risk (B + C) was calculated.

resultsAmong 112 patients (mean age 64.3 years, 63 men), group C had the largest number and volume of BM, followed by group B (4.4 and 851.6 mm

conclusionDLS-based detection and quantification of BM have the potential to be helpful in the determination of treatment options for both low- and high-risk groups of limited and extensive BMs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: For patients with newly diagnosed brain metastasis, deep learning-based detection and quantification may be used in clinical settings where prompt and accurate treatment decisions are required, which can lead to better patient outcomes. KEY POINTS: • Deep learning-based brain metastasis detection and quantification showed excellent agreement with ground-truth classifications. • By setting an algorithm to suggest treatment based on the number and volume of brain metastases detected by the deep learning system, the concordance was 81.3%. • When dividing patients into low- and high-risk groups, the sensitivity for detecting the latter was 95%.