Computational Challenges and Collaborative Projects in the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network

Overview

Journal Tomography

Publisher MDPI

Specialty Radiology

Date 2017 Aug 12

PMID 28798963

Citations 9

Authors

Keyvan Farahani

Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer

Thomas L Chenevert

Daniel L Rubin

John J Sunderland

Robert J Nordstrom

John Buatti

Nola Hylton

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) conducts research in development and validation of imaging tools and methods for predicting and evaluating clinical response to cancer therapy. Members of the network are involved in examining various imaging and image assessment parameters through network-wide cooperative projects. To more effectively use the cooperative power of the network in conducting computational challenges in benchmarking of tools and methods and collaborative projects in analytical assessment of imaging technologies, the QIN Challenge Task Force has developed policies and procedures to enhance the value of these activities by developing guidelines and leveraging NCI resources to help their administration and manage dissemination of results. Challenges and Collaborative Projects (CCPs) are further divided into technical and clinical CCPs. As the first NCI network to engage in CCPs, we anticipate a variety of CCPs to be conducted by QIN teams in the coming years. These will be aimed to benchmark advanced software tools for clinical decision support, explore new imaging biomarkers for therapeutic assessment, and establish consensus on a range of methods and protocols in support of the use of quantitative imaging to predict and assess response to cancer therapy.

Citing Articles

Revolutionizing healthcare: a comparative insight into deep learning's role in medical imaging.

Prasad V, Verma A, Bhattacharya P, Shah S, Chowdhury S, Bhavsar M Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):30273.

PMID: 39632902 PMC: 11618441. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-71358-7.

Multi-Site Concordance of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Quantification for Assessing Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness.

McGarry S, Brehler M, Bukowy J, Lowman A, Bobholz S, Duenweg S J Magn Reson Imaging. 2021; 55(6):1745-1758.

PMID: 34767682 PMC: 9095769. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27983.

Challenges in the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis from Multiparametric Imaging Data.

Corradini D, Brizi L, Gaudiano C, Bianchi L, Marcelli E, Golfieri R Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(16).

PMID: 34439099 PMC: 8391234. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13163944.

Intrasession Reliability of Arterial Spin-Labeled MRI-Measured Noncontrast Perfusion in Glioblastoma at 3 T.

Zhou L, Wang Y, Pinho M, Pan E, Xi Y, Maldjian J Tomography. 2020; 6(2):139-147.

PMID: 32548290 PMC: 7289238. DOI: 10.18383/j.tom.2020.00010.

Multisite Technical and Clinical Performance Evaluation of Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers from 3D FDG PET Segmentations of Head and Neck Cancer Images.

Smith B, Buatti J, Bauer C, Ulrich E, Ahmadvand P, Budzevich M Tomography. 2020; 6(2):65-76.

PMID: 32548282 PMC: 7289247. DOI: 10.18383/j.tom.2020.00004.

References

Norman T, Bountra C, Edwards A, Yamamoto K, Friend S . Leveraging crowdsourcing to facilitate the discovery of new medicines. Sci Transl Med. 2011; 3(88):88mr1. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3002678. View

Boudreau K, Lakhani K . Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harv Bus Rev. 2013; 91(4):60-9, 140. View

Chenevert T, Malyarenko D, Newitt D, Li X, Jayatilake M, Tudorica A . Errors in Quantitative Image Analysis due to Platform-Dependent Image Scaling. Transl Oncol. 2014; 7(1):65-71. PMC: 3998685. DOI: 10.1593/tlo.13811. View

McLennan M . Managing data within the HUBzero™ platform. OMICS. 2011; 15(4):247-9. DOI: 10.1089/omi.2011.0018. View

Saez-Rodriguez J, Costello J, Friend S, Kellen M, Mangravite L, Meyer P . Crowdsourcing biomedical research: leveraging communities as innovation engines. Nat Rev Genet. 2016; 17(8):470-86. PMC: 5918684. DOI: 10.1038/nrg.2016.69. View

Niemeijer M, van Ginneken B, Cree M, Mizutani A, Quellec G, Sanchez C . Retinopathy online challenge: automatic detection of microaneurysms in digital color fundus photographs. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009; 29(1):185-95. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2009.2033909. View

Murphy K, van Ginneken B, Reinhardt J, Kabus S, Ding K, Deng X . Evaluation of registration methods on thoracic CT: the EMPIRE10 challenge. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2011; 30(11):1901-20. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2011.2158349. View

Lakhani K, Boudreau K, Loh P, Backstrom L, Baldwin C, Lonstein E . Prize-based contests can provide solutions to computational biology problems. Nat Biotechnol. 2013; 31(2):108-11. PMC: 4527172. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2495. View

Hylton N, Gatsonis C, Rosen M, Lehman C, Newitt D, Partridge S . Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Functional Tumor Volume by MR Imaging Predicts Recurrence-free Survival-Results from the ACRIN 6657/CALGB 150007 I-SPY 1 TRIAL. Radiology. 2015; 279(1):44-55. PMC: 4819899. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015150013. View

10.

Crequit P, Trinquart L, Ravaud P . Live cumulative network meta-analysis: protocol for second-line treatments in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with wild-type or unknown status for epidermal growth factor receptor. BMJ Open. 2016; 6(8):e011841. PMC: 4985872. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011841. View

11.

Menze B, Jakab A, Bauer S, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Farahani K, Kirby J . The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS). IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2014; 34(10):1993-2024. PMC: 4833122. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2377694. View

12.

Kalpathy-Cramer J, Freymann J, Kirby J, Kinahan P, Prior F . Quantitative Imaging Network: Data Sharing and Competitive AlgorithmValidation Leveraging The Cancer Imaging Archive. Transl Oncol. 2014; 7(1):147-52. PMC: 3998686. DOI: 10.1593/tlo.13862. View

13.

Bentzien J, Bharadwaj R, Thompson D . Crowdsourcing in pharma: a strategic framework. Drug Discov Today. 2015; 20(7):874-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2015.01.011. View

14.

Armato 3rd S, Hadjiiski L, Tourassi G, Drukker K, Giger M, Li F . LUNGx Challenge for computerized lung nodule classification: reflections and lessons learned. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2015; 2(2):020103. PMC: 4489507. DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.2.2.020103. View

15.

Huang W, Chen Y, Fedorov A, Li X, Jajamovich G, Malyarenko D . The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge. Tomography. 2016; 2(1):56-66. PMC: 4869732. DOI: 10.18383/j.tom.2015.00184. View

16.

Huang W, Li X, Chen Y, Li X, Chang M, Oborski M . Variations of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of breast cancer therapy response: a multicenter data analysis challenge. Transl Oncol. 2014; 7(1):153-66. PMC: 3998693. DOI: 10.1593/tlo.13838. View

17.

Kalpathy-Cramer J, Zhao B, Goldgof D, Gu Y, Wang X, Yang H . A Comparison of Lung Nodule Segmentation Algorithms: Methods and Results from a Multi-institutional Study. J Digit Imaging. 2016; 29(4):476-87. PMC: 4942386. DOI: 10.1007/s10278-016-9859-z. View