AI tools in radiology are revolutionising the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of patients. However, there is a major gap between the large number of developed AI tools and those translated into daily clinical practice, which can be primarily attributed to limited usefulness and trust in current AI tools. Instead of technically driven development, little effort has been put into value-based development to ensure AI tools will have a clinically relevant impact on patient care.

An iterative comprehensive value evaluation process covering the complete AI tool lifecycle should be part of radiology AI development. For value assessment of health technologies, health technology assessment (HTA) is an extensively used and comprehensive method. While most aspects of value covered by HTA apply to radiology AI, additional aspects, including transparency, explainability, and robustness, are unique to radiology AI and crucial in its value assessment. Additionally, value assessment should already be included early in the design stage to determine the potential impact and subsequent requirements of the AI tool. Such early assessment should be systematic, transparent, and practical to ensure all stakeholders and value aspects are considered. Hence, early value-based development by incorporating early HTA will lead to more valuable AI tools and thus facilitate translation to clinical practice.@en

Treatment planning of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) includes distinguishing GISTs from other intra-abdominal tumors and GISTs’ molecular analysis. The aim of this study was to evaluate radiomics for distinguishing GISTs from other intra-abdominal tumors, and in GISTs, predict the c-KIT, PDGFRA, BRAF mutational status, and mitotic index (MI). Patients diagnosed at the Erasmus MC between 2004 and 2017, with GIST or non-GIST intra-abdominal tumors and a contrast-enhanced venous-phase CT, were retrospectively included. Tumors were segmented, from which 564 image features were extracted. Prediction models were constructed using a combination of machine learning approaches. The evaluation was performed in a 100 × random-split cross-validation. Model performance was compared to that of three radiologists. One hundred twenty-five GISTs and 122 non-GISTs were included. The GIST vs. non-GIST radiomics model had a mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.77. Three radiologists had an AUC of 0.69, 0.76, and 0.84, respectively. The radiomics model had an AUC of 0.52 for c-KIT, 0.56 for c-KIT exon 11, and 0.52 for the MI. The numbers of PDGFRA, BRAF, and other c-KIT mutations were too low for analysis. Our radiomics model was able to distinguish GISTs from non-GISTs with a performance similar to three radiologists, but less observer dependent. Therefore, it may aid in the early diagnosis of GIST, facilitating rapid referral to specialized treatment centers. As the model was not able to predict any genetic or molecular features, it cannot aid in treatment planning yet.

@en

Patients with BRAF mutated (BRAF-mt) metastatic melanoma benefit significantly from treatment with BRAF inhibitors. Currently, the BRAF status is determined on archival tumor tissue or on fresh tumor tissue from an invasive biopsy. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether radiomics can predict the BRAF status in a non-invasive manner. Patients with melanoma lung metastases, known BRAF status, and a pretreatment computed tomography scan were included. After semi-automatic annotation of the lung lesions (maximum two per patient), 540 radiomics features were extracted. A chest radiologist scored all segmented lung lesions according to the Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) criteria. Univariate analysis was performed to assess the predictive value of each feature for BRAF mutation status. A combination of various machine learning methods was used to develop BRAF decision models based on the radiomics features and LIDC criteria. A total of 169 lung lesions from 103 patients (51 BRAF-mt; 52 BRAF wild type) were included. There were no features with a significant discriminative value in the univariate analysis. Models based on radiomics features and LIDC criteria both performed as poorly as guessing. Hence, the BRAF mutation status in melanoma lung metastases cannot be predicted using radiomics features or visually scored LIDC criteria.

@en

Purpose: Diagnosing desmoid-type fibromatosis (DTF) requires an invasive tissue biopsy with β-catenin staining and CTNNB1 mutational analysis, and is challenging due to its rarity. The aim of this study was to evaluate radiomics for distinguishing DTF from soft tissue sarcomas (STS), and in DTF, for predicting the CTNNB1 mutation types. Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed extremity STS (non-DTF) or DTF and at least a pretreatment T1-weighted (T1w) MRI scan were retrospectively included. Tumors were semi-automatically annotated on the T1w scans, from which 411 features were extracted. Prediction models were created using a combination of various machine learning approaches. Evaluation was performed through a 100x random-split cross-validation. The model for DTF vs. non-DTF was compared to classification by two radiologists on a location matched subset. Results: The data included 203 patients (72 DTF, 131 STS). The T1w radiomics model showed a mean AUC of 0.79 on the full dataset. Addition of T2w or T1w post-contrast scans did not improve the performance. On the location matched cohort, the T1w model had a mean AUC of 0.88 while the radiologists had an AUC of 0.80 and 0.88, respectively. For the prediction of the CTNNB1 mutation types (S45 F, T41A and wild-type), the T1w model showed an AUC of 0.61, 0.56, and 0.74. Conclusions: Our radiomics model was able to distinguish DTF from STS with high accuracy similar to two radiologists, but was not able to predict the CTNNB1 mutation status.

@en