Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have resulted in significant enthusiasm for their promise in healthcare. Despite this, prospective randomized controlled trials and successful clinical implementation remain limited. One clinical application of ML is mitigation of the increased risk for acute care during outpatient cancer therapy. We previously reported the results of the System for High Intensity EvaLuation During Radiation Therapy (SHIELD-RT) study (NCT04277650), which was a prospective, randomized quality improvement study demonstrating that ML based on electronic health record (EHR) data can direct supplemental clinical evaluations and reduce the rate of acute care during cancer radiotherapy with and without chemotherapy. The objective of this study is to report the workflow and operational challenges encountered during ML implementation on the SHIELD-RT study. Results Data extraction and manual review steps in the workflow represented significant time commitments for implementation of clinical ML on a prospective, randomized study. Barriers include limited data availability through the standard clinical workflow and commercial products, the need to aggregate data from multiple sources, and logistical challenges from altering the standard clinical workflow to deliver adaptive care. Conclusions The SHIELD-RT study was an early randomized controlled study which enabled assessment of barriers to clinical ML implementation, specifically those which leverage the EHR. These challenges build on a growing body of literature and may provide lessons for future healthcare ML adoption. Trial registration : NCT04277650. Registered 20 February 2020. Retrospectively registered quality improvement study.

Aaron Newman and his colleagues introduce a next-generation sequencing–based approach for the cost-effective detection and quantitation of tumor-derived circulating DNA in both early- and advanced-stage tumors and with high levels of sensitivity and specificity. CAPP-Seq (cancer personalized profiling by deep sequencing) can simultaneously detect multiple mutations and mutation types, including rearrangements. Here, utility is demonstrated for non–small-cell lung cancer. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a promising biomarker for noninvasive assessment of cancer burden, but existing ctDNA detection methods have insufficient sensitivity or patient coverage for broad clinical applicability. Here we introduce cancer personalized profiling by deep sequencing (CAPP-Seq), an economical and ultrasensitive method for quantifying ctDNA. We implemented CAPP-Seq for non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a design covering multiple classes of somatic alterations that identified mutations in >95% of tumors. We detected ctDNA in 100% of patients with stage II–IV NSCLC and in 50% of patients with stage I, with 96% specificity for mutant allele fractions down to ∼0.02%. Levels of ctDNA were highly correlated with tumor volume and distinguished between residual disease and treatment-related imaging changes, and measurement of ctDNA levels allowed for earlier response assessment than radiographic approaches. Finally, we evaluated biopsy-free tumor screening and genotyping with CAPP-Seq. We envision that CAPP-Seq could be routinely applied clinically to detect and monitor diverse malignancies, thus facilitating personalized cancer therapy.

ObjectivesClinical artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) face barriers related to implementation and trust. There have been few prospective opportunities to evaluate these concerns. System for High Intensity EvaLuation During Radiotherapy (NCT03775265) was a randomised controlled study demonstrating that ML accurately directed clinical evaluations to reduce acute care during cancer radiotherapy. We characterised subsequent perceptions and barriers to implementation.MethodsAn anonymous 7-question Likert-type scale survey with optional free text was administered to multidisciplinary staff focused on workflow, agreement with ML and patient experience.Results59/71 (83%) responded. 81% disagreed/strongly disagreed their workflow was disrupted. 67% agreed/strongly agreed patients undergoing intervention were high risk. 75% agreed/strongly agreed they would implement the ML approach routinely if the study was positive. Free-text feedback focused on patient education and ML predictions.ConclusionsRandomised data and firsthand experience support positive reception of clinical ML. Providers highlighted future priorities, including patient counselling and workflow optimisation.

The purpose of this study was to quantify postimplantation migration of percutaneously implanted cylindrical gold seeds (“seeds”) and platinum endovascular embolization coils (“coils”) for tumor tracking in pulmonary stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). We retrospectively analyzed the migration of markers in 32 consecutive patients with computed tomography scans postimplantation and at simulation. We implanted 147 markers (59 seeds, 88 coils) in or around 34 pulmonary tumors over 32 procedures, with one lesion implanted twice. Marker coordinates were rigidly aligned by minimizing fiducial registration error (FRE), the root mean square of the differences in marker locations for each tumor between scans. To also evaluate whether single markers were responsible for most migration, we aligned with and without the outlier causing the largest FRE increase per tumor. We applied the resultant transformation to all markers. We evaluated migration of individual markers and FRE of each group. Median scan interval was 8 days. Median individual marker migration was 1.28 mm (interquartile range [IQR] 0.78−2.63 mm). Median lesion FRE was 1.56 mm (IQR 0.92−2.95 mm). Outlier identification yielded 1.03 mm median migration (IQR 0.52−2.21 mm) and 1.97 mm median FRE (IQR 1.44−4.32 mm). Outliers caused a mean and median shift in the centroid of 1.22 and 0.80 mm (95th percentile 2.52 mm). Seeds and coils had no statistically significant difference. Univariate analysis suggested no correlation of migration with the number of markers, contact with the chest wall, or time elapsed. Marker migration between implantation and simulation is limited and unlikely to cause geometric miss during tracking. PACS number: 87.57.N‐; 87.57.nm; 87.53.Ly