Artificial intelligence for prediction of treatment outcomes in breast cancer: Systematic review of design, reporting standards, and bias

被引:21
作者
Corti, Chiara [1 ,2 ,13 ]
Cobanaj, Marisa [3 ]
Marian, Federica [4 ]
Dee, Edward C. [5 ]
Lloyd, Maxwell R. [6 ]
Marcu, Sara [7 ]
Dombrovschi, Andra [8 ]
Biondetti, Giorgio P. [9 ]
Batalini, Felipe [10 ]
Celi, Leo A. [6 ,11 ,12 ]
Curigliano, Giuseppe [1 ,2 ,12 ]
机构
[1] IRCCS, Div New Drugs & Early Drug Dev Innovat Therapies, European Inst Oncol, Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Milan, Dept Oncol & Haematol DIPO, Milan, Italy
[3] Polytech Univ Milan, Dept Elect Informat & Bioengn, Milan, Italy
[4] DaVinci Healthcare, Milan, Italy
[5] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, New York, NY USA
[6] Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[7] SATE Syst & Adv Technol Engn, Venice, Italy
[8] synbrAIn, Milan, Italy
[9] OM1 Inc, Boston, MA USA
[10] Mayo Clin Canc Ctr, Womens Canc Program, Phoenix, AZ USA
[11] MIT, Lab Computat Physiol, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[12] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[13] IRCCS, Div New Drugs & Early Drug Dev Innovat Therapies, European Inst Oncol, Via Ripamonti 435, I-20141 Milan, Italy
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Artificial intelligence; Bias; Decision support; Breast cancer; Outcome prediction;
D O I
10.1016/j.ctrv.2022.102410
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to personalize treatment strategies for patients with cancer. However, current methodological weaknesses could limit clinical impact. We identified common limi-tations and suggested potential solutions to facilitate translation of AI to breast cancer management. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, SCOPUS, Google Scholar and PubMed Central in July 2021. Studies investigating the performance of AI to predict outcomes among patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer were included. Algorithm design and adherence to reporting standards were assessed following the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement. Risk of bias was assessed by using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), and correspondence with authors to assess data and code availability. Results: Our search identified 1,124 studies, of which 64 were included: 58 had a retrospective study design, with 6 studies with a prospective design. Access to datasets and code was severely limited (unavailable in 77% and 88% of studies, respectively). On request, data and code were made available in 28% and 18% of cases, respectively. Ethnicity was often under-reported (not reported in 52 of 64, 81%), as was model calibration (63/ 64, 99%). The risk of bias was high in 72% (46/64) of the studies, especially because of analysis bias. Conclusion: Development of AI algorithms should involve external and prospective validation, with improved code and data availability to enhance reliability and translation of this promising approach. Protocol registration number: PROSPERO -CRD42022292495.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 38 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2021, LANCET DIGIT HEALTH, V3, pE408, DOI 10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00113-8
  • [2] [Anonymous], OPTIMA IMI INN MED I
  • [3] The state of artificial intelligence-based FDA-approved medical devices and algorithms: an online database
    Benjamens, Stan
    Dhunnoo, Pranavsingh
    Mesko, Bertalan
    [J]. NPJ DIGITAL MEDICINE, 2020, 3 (01)
  • [4] "Big Data" in the Intensive Care Unit Closing the Data Loop
    Celi, Leo Anthony
    Mark, Roger G.
    Stone, David J.
    Montgomery, Robert A.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2013, 187 (11) : 1157 - 1160
  • [5] Who does the model learn from? Comment
    Charpignon, Marie-Laure
    Celi, Leo Anthony
    Samuel, Mathew Cherian
    [J]. LANCET DIGITAL HEALTH, 2021, 3 (05): : E275 - E276
  • [6] Discussing prognosis and treatment goals with patients with advanced cancer: A qualitative analysis of oncologists' language
    Chou, Wen-ying Sylvia
    Hamel, Lauren M.
    Thai, Chan L.
    Debono, David
    Chapman, Robert A.
    Albrecht, Terrance L.
    Penner, Louis A.
    Eggly, Susan
    [J]. HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2017, 20 (05) : 1073 - 1080
  • [7] Sex and gender differences and biases in artificial intelligence for biomedicine and healthcare
    Cirillo, Davide
    Catuara-Solarz, Silvina
    Morey, Czuee
    Guney, Emre
    Subirats, Laia
    Mellino, Simona
    Gigante, Annalisa
    Valencia, Alfonso
    Rementeria, Maria Jose
    Chadha, Antonella Santuccione
    Mavridis, Nikolaos
    [J]. NPJ DIGITAL MEDICINE, 2020, 3 (01)
  • [8] Collins GS., 2014, BMJ, V350
  • [9] Fraikin G, 2019, FABRIC GENOMICS ANNO
  • [10] Futoma J, 2020, LANCET DIGIT HEALTH, V2, pE489, DOI 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30186-2