Gianluca Brugnara

Background Pseudoprogression (PsPD) is a major diagnostic challenge in the follow-up of patients with glioblastoma (GB) after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Conventional imaging signs and parameters derived from diffusion and perfusion-MRI have yet to prove their reliability in clinical practice for an accurate differential diagnosis. Here, we tested these parameters and combined them with radiomic features (RFs), clinical data, and MGMT promoter methylation status using machine- and deep-learning (DL) models to distinguish PsPD from Progressive disease. Methods In a single-center analysis, 105 patients with GB who developed a suspected imaging PsPD in the first 7 months after standard CRT were identified retrospectively. Imaging data included standard MRI anatomical sequences, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and normalized relative cerebral blood volume (nrCBV) maps. Median values (ADC, nrCBV) and RFs (all sequences) were calculated from DL-based tumor segmentations. Generalized linear models with LASSO feature-selection and DL models were built integrating clinical data, MGMT methylation status, median ADC and nrCBV values and RFs. Results A model based on clinical data and MGMT methylation status yielded an areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.69 (95% CI 0.55–0.83) for detecting PsPD, and the addition of median ADC and nrCBV values resulted in a nonsignificant increase in performance (AUC = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.85, P = .416). Combining clinical/MGMT information with RFs derived from ADC, nrCBV, and from all available sequences both resulted in significantly (both P < .005) lower model performances, with AUC = 0.52 (0.38–0.66) and AUC = 0.54 (0.40–0.68), respectively. DL imaging models resulted in AUCs ≤ 0.56. Conclusion Currently available imaging biomarkers could not reliably differentiate PsPD from true tumor progression in patients with glioblastoma; larger collaborative efforts are needed to build more reliable models.

Background To assess whether artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support allows more reproducible and standardized assessment of treatment response on MRI in neuro-oncology as compared to manual 2-dimensional measurements of tumor burden using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria. Methods A series of 30 patients (15 lower-grade gliomas, 15 glioblastoma) with availability of consecutive MRI scans was selected. The time to progression (TTP) on MRI was separately evaluated for each patient by 15 investigators over two rounds. In the first round the TTP was evaluated based on the RANO criteria, whereas in the second round the TTP was evaluated by incorporating additional information from AI-enhanced MRI sequences depicting the longitudinal changes in tumor volumes. The agreement of the TTP measurements between investigators was evaluated using concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) with confidence intervals (CI) and P-values obtained using bootstrap resampling. Results The CCC of TTP-measurements between investigators was 0.77 (95% CI = 0.69,0.88) with RANO alone and increased to 0.91 (95% CI = 0.82,0.95) with AI-based decision support (P = .005). This effect was significantly greater (P = .008) for patients with lower-grade gliomas (CCC = 0.70 [95% CI = 0.56,0.85] without vs. 0.90 [95% CI = 0.76,0.95] with AI-based decision support) as compared to glioblastoma (CCC = 0.83 [95% CI = 0.75,0.92] without vs. 0.86 [95% CI = 0.78,0.93] with AI-based decision support). Investigators with less years of experience judged the AI-based decision as more helpful (P = .02). Conclusions AI-based decision support has the potential to yield more reproducible and standardized assessment of treatment response in neuro-oncology as compared to manual 2-dimensional measurements of tumor burden, particularly in patients with lower-grade gliomas. A fully-functional version of this AI-based processing pipeline is provided as open-source (https://github.com/NeuroAI-HD/HD-GLIO-XNAT).