Davide Ciucci, Bartolomeo Cassano, Salvatore Donatiello, Federica Martire, Antonio Napolitano, Claudia Polito, Elena Solfaroli Camillocci, Gianluca Cervino, Ludovica Pungitore, Claudio Altini, Maria Felicia Villani, Milena Pizzoferro, Maria Carmen Garganese, Vittorio Cannatà
{"title":"Fit of biokinetic data in molecular radiotherapy: a machine learning approach","authors":"Davide Ciucci, Bartolomeo Cassano, Salvatore Donatiello, Federica Martire, Antonio Napolitano, Claudia Polito, Elena Solfaroli Camillocci, Gianluca Cervino, Ludovica Pungitore, Claudio Altini, Maria Felicia Villani, Milena Pizzoferro, Maria Carmen Garganese, Vittorio Cannatà","doi":"10.1186/s40658-024-00623-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In literature are reported different analytical methods (AM) to choose the proper fit model and to fit data of the time-activity curve (TAC). On the other hand, Machine Learning algorithms (ML) are increasingly used for both classification and regression tasks. The aim of this work was to investigate the possibility of employing ML both to classify the most appropriate fit model and to predict the area under the curve (τ). Two different ML systems have been developed for classifying the fit model and to predict the biokinetic parameters. The two systems were trained and tested with synthetic TACs simulating a whole-body Fraction Injected Activity for patients affected by metastatic Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma, administered with [131I]I-NaI. Test performances, defined as classification accuracy (CA) and percentage difference between the actual and the estimated area under the curve (Δτ), were compared with those obtained using AM varying the number of points (N) of the TACs. A comparison between AM and ML were performed using data of 20 real patients. As N varies, CA remains constant for ML (about 98%), while it improves for F-test (from 62 to 92%) and AICc (from 50 to 92%), as N increases. With AM, $$\\Delta \\tau$$ can reach down to − 67%, while using ML $$\\Delta \\tau$$ ranges within ± 25%. Using real TACs, there is a good agreement between τ obtained with ML system and AM. The employing of ML systems may be feasible, having both a better classification and a better estimation of biokinetic parameters.","PeriodicalId":11559,"journal":{"name":"EJNMMI Physics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJNMMI Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-024-00623-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In literature are reported different analytical methods (AM) to choose the proper fit model and to fit data of the time-activity curve (TAC). On the other hand, Machine Learning algorithms (ML) are increasingly used for both classification and regression tasks. The aim of this work was to investigate the possibility of employing ML both to classify the most appropriate fit model and to predict the area under the curve (τ). Two different ML systems have been developed for classifying the fit model and to predict the biokinetic parameters. The two systems were trained and tested with synthetic TACs simulating a whole-body Fraction Injected Activity for patients affected by metastatic Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma, administered with [131I]I-NaI. Test performances, defined as classification accuracy (CA) and percentage difference between the actual and the estimated area under the curve (Δτ), were compared with those obtained using AM varying the number of points (N) of the TACs. A comparison between AM and ML were performed using data of 20 real patients. As N varies, CA remains constant for ML (about 98%), while it improves for F-test (from 62 to 92%) and AICc (from 50 to 92%), as N increases. With AM, $$\Delta \tau$$ can reach down to − 67%, while using ML $$\Delta \tau$$ ranges within ± 25%. Using real TACs, there is a good agreement between τ obtained with ML system and AM. The employing of ML systems may be feasible, having both a better classification and a better estimation of biokinetic parameters.
文献报道了不同的分析方法(AM)来选择合适的拟合模型和拟合时间-活动曲线(TAC)数据。另一方面,机器学习算法(ML)越来越多地用于分类和回归任务。这项工作的目的是研究使用 ML 对最合适的拟合模型进行分类和预测曲线下面积 (τ) 的可能性。我们开发了两种不同的 ML 系统,用于对拟合模型进行分类和预测生物动力学参数。对这两个系统进行了训练,并用合成的 TAC 进行了测试,模拟了转移性分化型甲状腺癌患者全身分部注射活动,用 [131I]I-NaI 给药。通过改变 TACs 的点数(N),将分类准确度(CA)和实际与估计曲线下面积(Δτ)之间的百分比差定义为测试性能,并与 AM 所获得的性能进行比较。使用 20 位实际患者的数据对 AM 和 ML 进行了比较。随着 N 的变化,ML 的 CA 保持不变(约 98%),而随着 N 的增加,F 检验(从 62% 到 92%)和 AICc(从 50% 到 92%)都有所改善。使用 AM 时,$$\delta \tau$$可低至 -67%,而使用 ML 时,$$\delta \tau$$ 的范围为 ±25%。使用真实的 TAC,ML 系统和 AM 系统得到的 τ 非常一致。使用 ML 系统可能是可行的,因为它既能更好地分类,又能更好地估计生物动力学参数。
期刊介绍:
EJNMMI Physics is an international platform for scientists, users and adopters of nuclear medicine with a particular interest in physics matters. As a companion journal to the European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, this journal has a multi-disciplinary approach and welcomes original materials and studies with a focus on applied physics and mathematics as well as imaging systems engineering and prototyping in nuclear medicine. This includes physics-driven approaches or algorithms supported by physics that foster early clinical adoption of nuclear medicine imaging and therapy.