1
|
Wahid KA, Kaffey ZY, Farris DP, Humbert-Vidan L, Moreno AC, Rasmussen M, Ren J, Naser MA, Netherton TJ, Korreman S, Balakrishnan G, Fuller CD, Fuentes D, Dohopolski MJ. Artificial Intelligence Uncertainty Quantification in Radiotherapy Applications - A Scoping Review. MEDRXIV : THE PREPRINT SERVER FOR HEALTH SCIENCES 2024:2024.05.13.24307226. [PMID: 38798581 PMCID: PMC11118597 DOI: 10.1101/2024.05.13.24307226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/29/2024]
Abstract
Background/purpose The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiotherapy (RT) is expanding rapidly. However, there exists a notable lack of clinician trust in AI models, underscoring the need for effective uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods. The purpose of this study was to scope existing literature related to UQ in RT, identify areas of improvement, and determine future directions. Methods We followed the PRISMA-ScR scoping review reporting guidelines. We utilized the population (human cancer patients), concept (utilization of AI UQ), context (radiotherapy applications) framework to structure our search and screening process. We conducted a systematic search spanning seven databases, supplemented by manual curation, up to January 2024. Our search yielded a total of 8980 articles for initial review. Manuscript screening and data extraction was performed in Covidence. Data extraction categories included general study characteristics, RT characteristics, AI characteristics, and UQ characteristics. Results We identified 56 articles published from 2015-2024. 10 domains of RT applications were represented; most studies evaluated auto-contouring (50%), followed by image-synthesis (13%), and multiple applications simultaneously (11%). 12 disease sites were represented, with head and neck cancer being the most common disease site independent of application space (32%). Imaging data was used in 91% of studies, while only 13% incorporated RT dose information. Most studies focused on failure detection as the main application of UQ (60%), with Monte Carlo dropout being the most commonly implemented UQ method (32%) followed by ensembling (16%). 55% of studies did not share code or datasets. Conclusion Our review revealed a lack of diversity in UQ for RT applications beyond auto-contouring. Moreover, there was a clear need to study additional UQ methods, such as conformal prediction. Our results may incentivize the development of guidelines for reporting and implementation of UQ in RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kareem A. Wahid
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Zaphanlene Y. Kaffey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - David P. Farris
- Research Medical Library, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Laia Humbert-Vidan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | - Jintao Ren
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | - Mohamed A. Naser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Tucker J. Netherton
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Stine Korreman
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | | | - Clifton D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - David Fuentes
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Michael J. Dohopolski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wahid KA, Sahlsten J, Jaskari J, Dohopolski MJ, Kaski K, He R, Glerean E, Kann BH, Mäkitie A, Fuller CD, Naser MA, Fuentes D. Harnessing uncertainty in radiotherapy auto-segmentation quality assurance. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 29:100526. [PMID: 38179210 PMCID: PMC10765294 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2023] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/06/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kareem A. Wahid
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jaakko Sahlsten
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
| | - Joel Jaskari
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
| | - Michael J. Dohopolski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Kimmo Kaski
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
| | - Renjie He
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Enrico Glerean
- Department of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
| | - Benjamin H. Kann
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Program, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Antti Mäkitie
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Research Program in Systems Oncology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Clifton D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mohamed A. Naser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David Fuentes
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|