Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38355986›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2024

Artificial intelligence in immunotherapy PET/SPECT imaging.

Jeremy P McGale, Delphine L Chen, Stefano Trebeschi, Michael D Farwell, Anna M Wu, Cathy S Cutler, Lawrence H Schwartz, Laurent Dercle

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Jeremy P McGaleDepartment of Radiology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA. jm4782@cumc.columbia.edu.
Delphine L ChenDepartment of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Stefano TrebeschiDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Michael D FarwellDepartment of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Anna M WuDepartment of Immunology and Theranostics, Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Cathy S CutlerCollider Accelerator Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, USA.
Lawrence H SchwartzDepartment of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Laurent DercleDepartment of Radiology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA. ld2752@cumc.columbia.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveImmunotherapy has dramatically altered the therapeutic landscape for oncology, but more research is needed to identify patients who are likely to achieve durable clinical benefit and those who may develop unacceptable side effects. We investigated the role of artificial intelligence in PET/SPECT-guided approaches for immunotherapy-treated patients.

methodsWe performed a scoping review of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Embase databases using key terms related to immunotherapy, PET/SPECT imaging, and AI/radiomics through October 12, 2022.

resultsOf the 217 studies identified in our literature search, 24 relevant articles were selected. The median (interquartile range) sample size of included patient cohorts was 63 (157). Primary tumors of interest were lung (n = 14/24, 58.3%), lymphoma (n = 4/24, 16.7%), or melanoma (n = 4/24, 16.7%). A total of 28 treatment regimens were employed, including anti-PD-(L)1 (n = 13/28, 46.4%) and anti-CTLA-4 (n = 4/28, 14.3%) monoclonal antibodies. Predictive models were built from imaging features using univariate radiomics (n = 7/24, 29.2%), radiomics (n = 12/24, 50.0%), or deep learning (n = 5/24, 20.8%) and were most often used to prognosticate (n = 6/24, 25.0%) or describe tumor phenotype (n = 5/24, 20.8%). Eighteen studies (75.0%) performed AI model validation.

conclusionPreliminary results suggest broad potential for the application of AI-guided immunotherapy management after further validation of models on large, prospective, multicenter cohorts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This scoping review describes how artificial intelligence models are built to make predictions based on medical imaging and explores their application specifically in the PET and SPECT examination of immunotherapy-treated cancers. KEY POINTS: • Immunotherapy has drastically altered the cancer treatment landscape but is known to precipitate response patterns that are not accurately accounted for by traditional imaging methods. • There is an unmet need for better tools to not only facilitate in-treatment evaluation but also to predict, a priori, which patients are likely to achieve a good response with a certain treatment as well as those who are likely to develop side effects. • Artificial intelligence applied to PET/SPECT imaging of immunotherapy-treated patients is mainly used to make predictions about prognosis or tumor phenotype and is built from baseline, pre-treatment images. Further testing is required before a true transition to clinical application can be realized.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceImmunotherapyNeoplasmsTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonHumansPositron-Emission TomographyArtificial intelligenceImmunotherapyPositron emission tomographySingle-photon emission computed tomography

Identifiers

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.