ABSTRACT
Gliomas are the most common type of primary brain tumors. Although gliomas are relatively rare, they are among the deadliest types of cancer, with a survival rate of less than 2 years after diagnosis. Gliomas are challenging to diagnose, hard to treat and inherently resistant to conventional therapy. Years of extensive research to improve diagnosis and treatment of gliomas have decreased mortality rates across the Global North, while chances of survival among individuals in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remain unchanged and are significantly worse in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) populations. Long-term survival with glioma is associated with the identification of appropriate pathological features on brain MRI and confirmation by histopathology. Since 2012, the Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) Challenge have evaluated state-of-the-art machine learning methods to detect, characterize, and classify gliomas. However, it is unclear if the state-of-the-art methods can be widely implemented in SSA given the extensive use of lower-quality MRI technology, which produces poor image contrast and resolution and more importantly, the propensity for late presentation of disease at advanced stages as well as the unique characteristics of gliomas in SSA (i.e., suspected higher rates of gliomatosis cerebri). Thus, the BraTS-Africa Challenge provides a unique opportunity to include brain MRI glioma cases from SSA in global efforts through the BraTS Challenge to develop and evaluate computer-aided-diagnostic (CAD) methods for the detection and characterization of glioma in resource-limited settings, where the potential for CAD tools to transform healthcare are more likely.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This systematic review provides a consensus on the clinical feasibility of machine learning (ML) methods for brain PET attenuation correction (AC). Performance of ML-AC were compared to clinical standards. METHODS: Two hundred and eighty studies were identified through electronic searches of brain PET studies published between January 1, 2008, and August 1, 2022. Reported outcomes for image quality, tissue classification performance, regional and global bias were extracted to evaluate ML-AC performance. Methodological quality of included studies and the quality of evidence of analysed outcomes were assessed using QUADAS-2 and GRADE, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies (2371 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the global bias of ML methods was 0.76 ± 1.2%. For image quality, the relative mean square error (RMSE) was 0.20 ± 0.4 while for tissues classification, the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for bone/soft tissue/air were 0.82 ± 0.1 / 0.95 ± 0.03 / 0.85 ± 0.14. CONCLUSIONS: In general, ML-AC performance is within acceptable limits for clinical PET imaging. The sparse information on ML-AC robustness and its limited qualitative clinical evaluation may hinder clinical implementation in neuroimaging, especially for PET/MRI or emerging brain PET systems where standard AC approaches are not readily available.
