OC-0474 Bias and reporting quality of artificial intelligence models in radiotherapy treatment planning

2021 ◽  
Vol 161 ◽  
pp. S362-S363
Author(s):  
M. Sharabiani ◽  
E. Clementel ◽  
N. Andratschke ◽  
N. Reynaert ◽  
W. van Elmpt ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 153303381987392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunhao Wang ◽  
Xiaofeng Zhu ◽  
Julian C. Hong ◽  
Dandan Zheng

Treatment planning is an essential step of the radiotherapy workflow. It has become more sophisticated over the past couple of decades with the help of computer science, enabling planners to design highly complex radiotherapy plans to minimize the normal tissue damage while persevering sufficient tumor control. As a result, treatment planning has become more labor intensive, requiring hours or even days of planner effort to optimize an individual patient case in a trial-and-error fashion. More recently, artificial intelligence has been utilized to automate and improve various aspects of medical science. For radiotherapy treatment planning, many algorithms have been developed to better support planners. These algorithms focus on automating the planning process and/or optimizing dosimetric trade-offs, and they have already made great impact on improving treatment planning efficiency and plan quality consistency. In this review, the smart planning tools in current clinical use are summarized in 3 main categories: automated rule implementation and reasoning, modeling of prior knowledge in clinical practice, and multicriteria optimization. Novel artificial intelligence–based treatment planning applications, such as deep learning–based algorithms and emerging research directions, are also reviewed. Finally, the challenges of artificial intelligence–based treatment planning are discussed for future works.


2011 ◽  
Vol 84 (1004) ◽  
pp. 750-755 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Mcjury ◽  
A O'Neill ◽  
M Lawson ◽  
C Mcgrath ◽  
A Grey ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
pp. 278-286
Author(s):  
Nicola Maffei ◽  
Luigi Manco ◽  
Giovanni Aluisio ◽  
Elisa D'Angelo ◽  
Patrizia Ferrazza ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert T. Young ◽  
Kristen Fernandez ◽  
Jacob Pfau ◽  
Rasika Reddy ◽  
Nhat Anh Cao ◽  
...  

AbstractArtificial intelligence models match or exceed dermatologists in melanoma image classification. Less is known about their robustness against real-world variations, and clinicians may incorrectly assume that a model with an acceptable area under the receiver operating characteristic curve or related performance metric is ready for clinical use. Here, we systematically assessed the performance of dermatologist-level convolutional neural networks (CNNs) on real-world non-curated images by applying computational “stress tests”. Our goal was to create a proxy environment in which to comprehensively test the generalizability of off-the-shelf CNNs developed without training or evaluation protocols specific to individual clinics. We found inconsistent predictions on images captured repeatedly in the same setting or subjected to simple transformations (e.g., rotation). Such transformations resulted in false positive or negative predictions for 6.5–22% of skin lesions across test datasets. Our findings indicate that models meeting conventionally reported metrics need further validation with computational stress tests to assess clinic readiness.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document