Knowledge-driven decision support for assessing dose distributions in radiation therapy of head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: Clinical data that are generated through routine radiation therapy procedures can be leveraged as a source of knowledge to provide evidence-based decision support for future patients. Treatment planning in radiation therapy often relies on trial-and-error iterations, experience, judgment calls and general guidelines. The authors present a knowledge-driven decision support system that assists clinicians by reducing some of the uncertainties associated with treatment planning and provides quantified empirical estimates to help minimize the radiation dose to healthy critical structures surrounding the tumor. METHODS: A database of retrospective DICOM RT data fuels a decision support engine, which assists clinicians in selecting dose constraints and assessing dose distributions. The first step is to quantify the spatial relationships between the tumor and surrounding critical structures through features that account for distance, volume, overlap, location, shape and orientation. These features are used to identify database cases that are anatomically similar to the new patient. The dose profiles of these database cases can help clinicians to estimate an acceptable dose distribution for the new case, based on empirical evidence. Since database diversity is essential for good system performance, an infrastructure for multi-institutional collaboration was also conceptualized in order to pave the way for data sharing of protected health information. RESULTS: A set of 127 retrospective test cases was collected from a single institution in order to conduct a leave-one-out evaluation of the decision support module. In 72 % of these retrospective test cases, patients with similar tumor anatomy were also found to exhibit similar radiation dose distributions. This demonstrates the system's ability to successfully extract retrospective database cases that can estimate the new patient's dose distribution. CONCLUSION: The radiation therapy treatment planning decision support system presented here can assist clinicians in determining good dose constraints and assessing dose distributions by using knowledge gained from retrospective treatment plans.

Medical imaging informatics simulators: a tutorial.

PURPOSE: A medical imaging informatics infrastructure (MIII) platform is an organized method of selecting tools and synthesizing data from HIS/RIS/PACS/ePR systems with the aim of developing an imaging-based diagnosis or treatment system. Evaluation and analysis of these systems can be made more efficient by designing and implementing imaging informatics simulators. This tutorial introduces the MIII platform and provides the definition of treatment/diagnosis systems, while primarily focusing on the development of the related simulators. METHODS: A medical imaging informatics (MII) simulator in this context is defined as a system integration of many selected imaging and data components from the MIII platform and clinical treatment protocols, which can be used to simulate patient workflow and data flow starting from diagnostic procedures to the completion of treatment. In these processes, DICOM and HL-7 standards, IHE workflow profiles, and Web-based tools are emphasized. From the information collected in the database of a specific simulator, evidence-based medicine can be hypothesized to choose and integrate optimal clinical decision support components. Other relevant, selected clinical resources in addition to data and tools from the HIS/RIS/PACS and ePRs platform may also be tailored to develop the simulator. These resources can include image content indexing, 3D rendering with visualization, data grid and cloud computing, computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) methods, specialized image-assisted surgical, and radiation therapy technologies. RESULTS: Five simulators will be discussed in this tutorial. The PACS-ePR simulator with image distribution is the cradle of the other simulators. It supplies the necessary PACS-based ingredients and data security for the development of four other simulators: the data grid simulator for molecular imaging, CAD-PACS, radiation therapy simulator, and image-assisted surgery simulator. The purpose and benefits of each simulator with respect to its clinical relevance are presented. CONCLUSION: The concept, design, and development of these five simulators have been implemented in laboratory settings for education and training. Some of them have been extended to clinical applications in hospital environments.

An observer study for a computer-aided reading protocol (CARP) in the screening environment for digital mammography.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to investigate improving work flow efficiency by shortening the reading time of digital mammograms using a computer-aided reading protocol (CARP) in the screening environment and to increase detection sensitivity using CARP, compared to the current protocol, commonly referred to as the quadrant view (QV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 200 cases were selected for a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) study to evaluate two image display work flows, CARP and QV, in the screening environment. A Web-based tool was developed for scoring, reporting, and statistical analysis. Cases were scored for and stratified by difficulty. A total of six radiologists of differing levels of training ranging from dedicated mammographers to senior radiology residents participated. Each was timed while interpreting the 200 cases in groups of 50, first using QV and then, after a washout period, using CARP. The data were analyzed using ROC and κ analysis. Interpretation times were also assessed. RESULTS: Using QV, readers' average area under the ROC curve was 0.68 (range, 0.54-0.73). Using CARP, readers' average area under the ROC curve was 0.71 (range, 0.66-0.75). There was no statistically significant difference in reader performance using either work flow. However, there was a statistically significant reduction in the average interpretation time of negative cases from 64.7 seconds using QV to 58.8 seconds using CARP. CONCLUSIONS: CARP determines the display order of regions of interest depending on computer-aided detection findings. This is a variation of traditional computer-aided detection for digital mammography that has the potential to reduce interpretation times of studies with negative findings without significantly affecting sensitivity, thus allowing improved work flow efficiency in the screening environment, in which, in most settings, the majority of cases are negative.