ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024
The distinct roles of reinforcement learning between pre-procedure and intra-procedure planning for prostate biopsy.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMagnetic resonance (MR) imaging targeted prostate cancer (PCa) biopsy enables precise sampling of MR-detected lesions, establishing its importance in recommended clinical practice. Planning for the ultrasound-guided procedure involves pre-selecting needle sampling positions. However, performing this procedure is subject to a number of factors, including MR-to-ultrasound registration, intra-procedure patient movement and soft tissue motions. When a fixed pre-procedure planning is carried out without intra-procedure adaptation, these factors will lead to sampling errors which could cause false positives and false negatives. Reinforcement learning (RL) has been proposed for procedure plannings on similar applications such as this one, because intelligent agents can be trained for both pre-procedure and intra-procedure planning. However, it is not clear if RL is beneficial when it comes to addressing these intra-procedure errors.
methodsIn this work, we develop and compare imitation learning (IL), supervised by demonstrations of predefined sampling strategy, and RL approaches, under varying degrees of intra-procedure motion and registration error, to represent sources of targeting errors likely to occur in an intra-operative procedure.
resultsBased on results using imaging data from 567 PCa patients, we demonstrate the efficacy and value in adopting RL algorithms to provide intelligent intra-procedure action suggestions, compared to IL-based planning supervised by commonly adopted policies.
conclusionsThe improvement in biopsy sampling performance for intra-procedure planning has not been observed in experiments with only pre-procedure planning. These findings suggest a strong role for RL in future prospective studies which adopt intra-procedure planning. Our open source code implementation is available here .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.