Abstract
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 193-206 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | European Journal of Cancer |
Volume | 176 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Nov 2022 |
Keywords
- Artificial intelligence
- Colorectal cancer
- Computed tomography
- Imaging
- Positron emission tomography
- Radiomics
- Standardisation
Access to Document
Other files and links
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver
}
In: European Journal of Cancer, Vol. 176, 01.11.2022, p. 193-206.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Imaging standardisation in metastatic colorectal cancer
T2 - A joint EORTC-ESOI-ESGAR expert consensus recommendation
AU - Unterrainer, Marcus
AU - Deroose, Christophe M.
AU - Herrmann, Ken
AU - Moehler, Markus
AU - Blomqvist, Lennart
AU - Cannella, Roberto
AU - Caramella, Caroline
AU - Caruso, Damiano
AU - Chouhan, Manil D.
AU - Denecke, Timm
AU - de la Pinta, Carolina
AU - de Geus-Oei, Lioe-Fee
AU - Dulskas, Audrius
AU - Eisenblätter, Michel
AU - Foley, Kieran G.
AU - Gourtsoyianni, Sofia
AU - Lecouvet, Frederic E.
AU - Lopci, Egesta
AU - Maas, Monique
AU - Obmann, Markus M.
AU - Oprea-Lager, Daniela E.
AU - Verhoeff, Joost J. C.
AU - Santiago, Ines
AU - Terraz, Sylvain
AU - D'Anastasi, Melvin
AU - Regge, Daniele
AU - Laghi, Andrea
AU - Beets-Tan, Regina G. H.
AU - the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group
AU - Heinemann, Volker
AU - the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Group
AU - Lordick, Florian
AU - the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR)
AU - Smyth, Elizabeth C.
AU - Ricke, Jens
AU - Kunz, Wolfgang G.
N1 - Funding Information: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: K.H. reports personal fees from Bayer, personal fees and other from Sofie Biosciences, personal fees from SIRTEX, non-financial support from ABX, personal fees from Adacap, personal fees from Curium, personal fees from Endocyte, grants and personal fees from BTG, personal fees from IPSEN, personal fees from Siemens Healthineers, personal fees from GE Healthcare, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Y-mAbs, all outside the submitted work. L.B. is a cofounder of Collective Minds Radiology. R.C. reports travel support by Bracco Imaging. T.D. reports honorary fees and travel support by Siemens, Canon, Bayer, b.e. imaging and research grants by Siemens Healthineers, Bayer, Guerbet and b.e. imaging. E.L. reports receiving research grants from AIRC and from the Italian Ministry of Health, and faculty remuneration from ESMIT (European School of Multimodality Imaging and Therapy) and MI&T Congressi. D.E.O.-L. received expert remuneration from EAU for participating in PET PSMA Consensus Meeting in January 2022. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest related to this study. W.G.K. reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb. Funding Information: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: K.H. reports personal fees from Bayer , personal fees and other from Sofie Biosciences , personal fees from SIRTEX , non-financial support from ABX, personal fees from Adacap , personal fees from Curium , personal fees from Endocyte , grants and personal fees from BTG , personal fees from IPSEN , personal fees from Siemens Healthineers , personal fees from GE Healthcare , personal fees from Amgen , personal fees from Novartis , personal fees from Y-mAbs , all outside the submitted work. L.B. is a cofounder of Collective Minds Radiology. R.C. reports travel support by Bracco Imaging . T.D. reports honorary fees and travel support by Siemens, Canon , Bayer, b.e. imaging and research grants by Siemens Healthineers, Bayer, Guerbet and b.e. imaging. E.L. reports receiving research grants from AIRC and from the Italian Ministry of Health , and faculty remuneration from ESMIT (European School of Multimodality Imaging and Therapy) and MI&T Congressi. D.E.O.-L. received expert remuneration from EAU for participating in PET PSMA Consensus Meeting in January 2022. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest related to this study. W.G.K. reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s)
PY - 2022/11/1
Y1 - 2022/11/1
N2 - Background: Treatment monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relies on imaging to evaluate the tumour burden. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors provide a framework on reporting and interpretation of imaging findings yet offer no guidance on a standardised imaging protocol tailored to patients with mCRC. Imaging protocol heterogeneity remains a challenge for the reproducibility of conventional imaging end-points and is an obstacle for research on novel imaging end-points. Patients and methods: Acknowledging the recently highlighted potential of radiomics and artificial intelligence tools as decision support for patient care in mCRC, a multidisciplinary, international and expert panel of imaging specialists was formed to find consensus on mCRC imaging protocols using the Delphi method. Results: Under the guidance of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging and Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Groups, the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), the EORTC-ESOI-ESGAR core imaging protocol was identified. Conclusion: This consensus protocol attempts to promote standardisation and to diminish variations in patient preparation, scan acquisition and scan reconstruction. We anticipate that this standardisation will increase reproducibility of radiomics and artificial intelligence studies and serve as a catalyst for future research on imaging end-points. For ongoing and future mCRC trials, we encourage principal investigators to support the dissemination of these imaging standards across recruiting centres.
AB - Background: Treatment monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relies on imaging to evaluate the tumour burden. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors provide a framework on reporting and interpretation of imaging findings yet offer no guidance on a standardised imaging protocol tailored to patients with mCRC. Imaging protocol heterogeneity remains a challenge for the reproducibility of conventional imaging end-points and is an obstacle for research on novel imaging end-points. Patients and methods: Acknowledging the recently highlighted potential of radiomics and artificial intelligence tools as decision support for patient care in mCRC, a multidisciplinary, international and expert panel of imaging specialists was formed to find consensus on mCRC imaging protocols using the Delphi method. Results: Under the guidance of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging and Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Groups, the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), the EORTC-ESOI-ESGAR core imaging protocol was identified. Conclusion: This consensus protocol attempts to promote standardisation and to diminish variations in patient preparation, scan acquisition and scan reconstruction. We anticipate that this standardisation will increase reproducibility of radiomics and artificial intelligence studies and serve as a catalyst for future research on imaging end-points. For ongoing and future mCRC trials, we encourage principal investigators to support the dissemination of these imaging standards across recruiting centres.
KW - Artificial intelligence
KW - Colorectal cancer
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Imaging
KW - Positron emission tomography
KW - Radiomics
KW - Standardisation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85140067011&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2022.09.012
DO - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2022.09.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 36274570
SN - 0959-8049
VL - 176
SP - 193
EP - 206
JO - European Journal of Cancer
JF - European Journal of Cancer
ER -