↓ Skip to main content

Machine Learning Applications in Head and Neck Radiation Oncology: Lessons From Open-Source Radiomics Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Machine Learning Applications in Head and Neck Radiation Oncology: Lessons From Open-Source Radiomics Challenges
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00294
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hesham Elhalawani, Timothy A. Lin, Stefania Volpe, Abdallah S. R. Mohamed, Aubrey L. White, James Zafereo, Andrew J. Wong, Joel E. Berends, Shady AboHashem, Bowman Williams, Jeremy M. Aymard, Aasheesh Kanwar, Subha Perni, Crosby D. Rock, Luke Cooksey, Shauna Campbell, Pei Yang, Khahn Nguyen, Rachel B. Ger, Carlos E. Cardenas, Xenia J. Fave, Carlo Sansone, Gabriele Piantadosi, Stefano Marrone, Rongjie Liu, Chao Huang, Kaixian Yu, Tengfei Li, Yang Yu, Youyi Zhang, Hongtu Zhu, Jeffrey S. Morris, Veerabhadran Baladandayuthapani, John W. Shumway, Alakonanda Ghosh, Andrei Pöhlmann, Hady A. Phoulady, Vibhas Goyal, Guadalupe Canahuate, G. Elisabeta Marai, David Vock, Stephen Y. Lai, Dennis S. Mackin, Laurence E. Court, John Freymann, Keyvan Farahani, Jayashree Kaplathy-Cramer, Clifton D. Fuller

Abstract

Radiomics leverages existing image datasets to provide non-visible data extraction via image post-processing, with the aim of identifying prognostic, and predictive imaging features at a sub-region of interest level. However, the application of radiomics is hampered by several challenges such as lack of image acquisition/analysis method standardization, impeding generalizability. As of yet, radiomics remains intriguing, but not clinically validated. We aimed to test the feasibility of a non-custom-constructed platform for disseminating existing large, standardized databases across institutions for promoting radiomics studies. Hence, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center organized two public radiomics challenges in head and neck radiation oncology domain. This was done in conjunction with MICCAI 2016 satellite symposium using Kaggle-in-Class, a machine-learning and predictive analytics platform. We drew on clinical data matched to radiomics data derived from diagnostic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) images in a dataset of 315 patients with oropharyngeal cancer. Contestants were tasked to develop models for (i) classifying patients according to their human papillomavirus status, or (ii) predicting local tumor recurrence, following radiotherapy. Data were split into training, and test sets. Seventeen teams from various professional domains participated in one or both of the challenges. This review paper was based on the contestants' feedback; provided by 8 contestants only (47%). Six contestants (75%) incorporated extracted radiomics features into their predictive model building, either alone (n = 5; 62.5%), as was the case with the winner of the "HPV" challenge, or in conjunction with matched clinical attributes (n = 2; 25%). Only 23% of contestants, notably, including the winner of the "local recurrence" challenge, built their model relying solely on clinical data. In addition to the value of the integration of machine learning into clinical decision-making, our experience sheds light on challenges in sharing and directing existing datasets toward clinical applications of radiomics, including hyper-dimensionality of the clinical/imaging data attributes. Our experience may help guide researchers to create a framework for sharing and reuse of already published data that we believe will ultimately accelerate the pace of clinical applications of radiomics; both in challenge or clinical settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 32 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 26%
Computer Science 11 10%
Engineering 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Physics and Astronomy 4 4%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 37 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2020.
All research outputs
#7,359,319
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#2,600
of 22,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,416
of 341,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#40
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,432 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.