ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Automatic longitudinal assessment of brain metastases improves detection of disease progression.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. 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.
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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Characterization of multiple brain metastases (BMs) during treatment is limited by lack of available tools for individual volumetric lesion tracking. This study investigated role of a Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS)-integrated artificial intelligence (AI) prototype lesion tracking tool (AI-LTT) for segmentation, enabling automatic assessment of longitudinal lesion changes compared to manual analysis by 2 neuroradiologists, focusing on inter-observer variability. Methods: Longitudinal studies of patients with BMs who underwent stereotactic radiotherapy were assessed. In manual workflow, 2 board-certified neuroradiologists displayed current and up to 7 prior studies of each patient and measured orthogonal lesion diameters (DMAX) manually. In AI-LTT-assisted workflow, a custom hanging protocol automatically selected, displayed, and 3D registered T1 gadolinium-enhanced MR sequences in up to 8 studies. A Scalable and Transferable U-Net (STU-Net) trained on BraTS METS 2023 BM dataset was used for segmentations from which DMAX were extrapolated. Neuroradiologists revised AI measurements as needed. Time and number of mouse clicks for both workflows were recorded. Results: A total of 40 patients with 158 MRIs were investigated. Median DSC of STU-Net segmentations was 0.771. Intra-class and Spearman correlation coefficients of manual diameter measurements were 0.959 and 0.961, respectively. Out of 353 true lesions, 59 were detected by only one (R1) and 15 by only the second neuroradiologist (R2). Among 74 lesions discrepant between readers, 14 proceeded to complete response, 4 partial response, 39 stable disease, but 12 developed progressive disease. Conclusions: AI-assisted workflow for BM analysis improves follow up of lesions and has potential to improve detection of lesions that progress over time of treatment.
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.