ABSTRACT
Objectives: To systematically review, assess the reporting quality of, and discuss improvement opportunities for studies describing machine learning (ML) models for glioma grade prediction. Methods: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) statement. A systematic search was performed in September 2020, and repeated in January 2021, on four databases: Embase, Medline, CENTRAL, and Web of Science Core Collection. Publications were screened in Covidence, and reporting quality was measured against the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) Statement. Descriptive statistics were calculated using GraphPad Prism 9. Results: The search identified 11,727 candidate articles with 1,135 articles undergoing full text review and 85 included in analysis. 67 (79%) articles were published between 2018-2021. The mean prediction accuracy of the best performing model in each study was 0.89 ± 0.09. The most common algorithm for conventional machine learning studies was Support Vector Machine (mean accuracy: 0.90 ± 0.07) and for deep learning studies was Convolutional Neural Network (mean accuracy: 0.91 ± 0.10). Only one study used both a large training dataset (n>200) and external validation (accuracy: 0.72) for their model. The mean adherence rate to TRIPOD was 44.5% ± 11.1%, with poor reporting adherence for model performance (0%), abstracts (0%), and titles (0%). Conclusions: The application of ML to glioma grade prediction has grown substantially, with ML model studies reporting high predictive accuracies but lacking essential metrics and characteristics for assessing model performance. Several domains, including generalizability and reproducibility, warrant further attention to enable translation into clinical practice. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020209938.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Thermal ablation (TA) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) may be used alone or in combination (TACE+TA) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of our study was to compare the time to tumor progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) for patients who received TA alone or TACE+TA for HCC tumors under 3 cm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant IRB-approved retrospective analysis included 85 therapy-naïve patients from 2010 to 2018 (63 males, 22 females, mean age 62.4 ± 8.5 years) who underwent either TA alone (n = 64) or TA in combination with drug-eluting beads (DEB)-TACE (n = 18) or Lipiodol-TACE (n = 3) for locoregional therapy of early stage HCC with maximum tumor diameter under 3 cm. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed using the log-rank test to assess TTP and OS. RESULTS: All TA and TACE+TA treatments included were technically successful. TTP was 23.0 months in the TA group and 22.0 months in the TACE+TA group. There was no statistically significant difference in TTP (p = 0.64). Median OS was 69.7 months in the TA group and 64.6 months in the TACE+TA group. There was no statistically significant difference in OS (p = 0.14). The treatment cohorts had differences in AFP levels (p = 0.03) and BCLC stage (p = 0.047). Complication rates between patient groups were similar (p = 0.61). CONCLUSION: For patients with HCC under 3 cm, TA alone and TACE+TA have similar outcomes in terms of TTP and OS, suggesting that TACE+TA may not be needed for these tumors unless warranted by tumor location or other technical consideration.