NIMG-17. A DEEP LEARNING MODEL FOR DISCRIMINATING TRUE PROGRESSION FROM PSEUDOPROGRESSION IN GLIOBLASTOMA PATIENTS. (14th November 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Moassefi, Mana; Faghani, Shahriar; Conte, Gian Marco; Kowalchuk, Roman; Vahdati, Sanaz; Crompton, David; Vega, Carlos Perez; Cabreja, Ricardo Domingo; Vora, Sujay; Quiñones-Hinojosa, Alfredo; Parney, Ian; Trifiletti, Daniel; Erickson, Bradley
• Is Part Of: Neuro-oncology. Volume 24(2022)Supplement 7
• Page Start: vii165
• Page End: vii165
• Publication Date: 2022-11-14
• Subjects: Brain Neoplasms -- Periodicals; Brain -- Tumors -- Periodicals; Brain -- Cancer -- Periodicals; Nervous system -- Cancer -- Periodicals; 616.99481
• DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noac209.635
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1522-8517

Abstract

Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Glioblastomas (GBMs) are highly aggressive tumors. A common clinical challenge after standard of care treatment is differentiating tumor progression from treatment-related changes, also known as pseudoprogression (PsP). Usually, PsP resolves or stabilizes without further treatment or a course of steroids, whereas true progression (TP) requires more aggressive management. Differentiating PsP from TP will affect the patient's outcome. This study investigated using deep learning to distinguish PsP MRI features from progressive disease. METHOD: We included newly diagnosed GBM patients who met the inclusion criteria, including a new or increasing enhancing lesion size within the original radiation field and who had clinical, medication, and any histopathology available. The interpretation of the MR images at the image inclusion time point had to be indeterminate. We labeled those who subsequently were stable or improved on imaging and clinically as PSP and those with clinical and imaging deterioration as TP. A subset of subjects underwent a second resection. We labeled these subjects as PSP or TP based on the histological diagnosis. We performed skull stripping, coregistered contrast-enhanced T1 MRIs with T2-weighted images for each patient and used them as input to a 3-D Densenet121 model. We used several augmentation techniques and five-fold cross-validation to achieve more robust predictions. RESULT: We included 124 patients who met the criteria, and of those, 63 were PsP and 61 were TP. We trained a deep learning model that achieved 76.4% (ranged 70%-84%, SD 5.122) mean accuracy over the 5 folds, 0.7560(ranged 0.6553-0.8535, SD 0.069) mean AUROCC, 88.72% (SD 6.86) mean sensitivity, and 62.05%(SD 9.11) mean specificity. CONCLUSION: We report the development of a deep learning model that distinguishes PsP from TP in GBM patients treated per the Stupp protocol. Further refinement and external validation are required prior to widespread adoption in clinical practice.