Use of artificial intelligence for cancer clinical trial enrollment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:16
|
作者
Chow, Ronald [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Midroni, Julie [1 ]
Kaur, Jagdeep [2 ]
Boldt, Gabriel [2 ]
Liu, Geoffrey [1 ]
Eng, Lawson [1 ]
Liu, Fei-Fei [1 ]
Haibe-Kains, Benjamin [1 ]
Lock, Michael [2 ]
Raman, Srinivas [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Univ Hlth Network, Temerty Fac Med, Princess Margaret Canc Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Western Ontario, London Hlth Sci Ctr, Schulich Sch Med & Dent, London Reg Canc Program, London, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Inst Biomed Engn, Fac Appl Sci & Engn, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Univ Hlth Network, Temerty Fac Med, Princess Margaret Canc Ctr, Toronto, ON M5G 2C1, Canada
来源
关键词
SELECTION; QUALITY; TOOL;
D O I
10.1093/jnci/djad013
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) for cancer clinical trial enrollment and its predictive accuracy in identifying eligible patients for inclusion in such trials. Methods Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched until June 2022. Articles were included if they reported on AI actively being used in the clinical trial enrollment process. Narrative synthesis was conducted among all extracted data: accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. For studies where the 2x2 contingency table could be calculated or supplied by authors, a meta-analysis to calculate summary statistics was conducted using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics curve model. Results Ten articles reporting on more than 50 000 patients in 19 datasets were included. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity exceeded 80% in all but 1 dataset. Positive predictive value exceeded 80% in 5 of 17 datasets. Negative predictive value exceeded 80% in all datasets. Summary sensitivity was 90.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 70.9% to 97.4%); summary specificity was 99.3% (95% CI = 81.8% to 99.9%). Conclusions AI demonstrated comparable, if not superior, performance to manual screening for patient enrollment into cancer clinical trials. As well, AI is highly efficient, requiring less time and human resources to screen patients. AI should be further investigated and implemented for patient recruitment into cancer clinical trials. Future research should validate the use of AI for clinical trials enrollment in less resource-rich regions and ensure broad inclusion for generalizability to all sexes, ages, and ethnicities.
引用
收藏
页码:365 / 374
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Use of artificial intelligence for gestational age estimation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Naz, Sabahat
    Noorani, Sahir
    Zaidi, Syed Ali Jaffar
    Rahman, Abdu R.
    Sattar, Saima
    Das, Jai K.
    Hoodbhoy, Zahra
    FRONTIERS IN GLOBAL WOMENS HEALTH, 2025, 6
  • [2] ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE ULTRASOUND DIAGNOSIS OF OVARIAN CANCER: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
    Mitchell, Sian
    Nikolopoulos, Manolis
    Zarka, Alaa
    Al-Karawi, Dhurgham
    Ghai, Avi
    Gaughran, Jonathan
    Muallem, Med Mustafa Zelal
    Sayasneh, Ahmad
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2023, 33 : A275 - A276
  • [3] The value of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Liu, Mingsi
    Wu, Jinghui
    Wang, Nian
    Zhang, Xianqin
    Bai, Yujiao
    Guo, Jinlin
    Zhang, Lin
    Liu, Shulin
    Tao, Ke
    PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (03):
  • [4] Artificial Intelligence in Ultrasound Diagnoses of Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Mitchell, Sian
    Nikolopoulos, Manolis
    El-Zarka, Alaa
    Al-Karawi, Dhurgham
    Al-Zaidi, Shakir
    Ghai, Avi
    Gaughran, Jonathan E.
    Sayasneh, Ahmad
    CANCERS, 2024, 16 (02)
  • [5] Artificial intelligence in osteoarthritis detection: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Mohammadi, Soheil
    Salehi, Mohammad Amin
    Jahanshahi, Ali
    Farahani, Mohammad Shahrabi
    Zakavi, Seyed Sina
    Behrouzieh, Sadra
    Gouravani, Mahdi
    Guermazi, Ali
    OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE, 2024, 32 (03) : 241 - 253
  • [6] Artificial Intelligence in Fracture Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Kuo, Rachel Y. L.
    Harrison, Conrad
    Curran, Terry-Ann
    Jones, Benjamin
    Freethy, Alexander
    Cussons, David
    Stewart, Max
    Collins, Gary S.
    Furniss, Dominic
    RADIOLOGY, 2022, 304 (01) : 50 - 62
  • [7] Artificial Intelligence in Laryngeal Endoscopy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Zurek, Michal
    Jasak, Kamil
    Niemczyk, Kazimierz
    Rzepakowska, Anna
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2022, 11 (10)
  • [8] Use of artificial intelligence in obstetric and gynaecological diagnostics: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chaurasia, Anjalee
    Curry, Georgia
    Zhao, Yi
    Dawoodbhoy, Fatema
    Green, Jennifer
    Vaninetti, Matilde
    Shah, Nishel
    Greer, Orene
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (05):
  • [9] Use of artificial intelligence in the detection of primary prostate cancer in multiparametric MRI with its clinical outcomes: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Thomas, Maya
    Murali, Sanjana
    Simpson, Benjamin Scott S.
    Freeman, Alex
    Kirkham, Alex
    Kelly, Daniel
    Whitaker, Hayley C.
    Zhao, Yi
    Emberton, Mark
    Norris, Joseph M.
    BMJ OPEN, 2023, 13 (08):
  • [10] A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence versus clinicians for skin cancer diagnosis
    Salinas, Maria Paz
    Sepulveda, Javiera
    Hidalgo, Leonel
    Peirano, Dominga
    Morel, Macarena
    Uribe, Pablo
    Rotemberg, Veronica
    Briones, Juan
    Mery, Domingo
    Navarrete-Dechent, Cristian
    NPJ DIGITAL MEDICINE, 2024, 7 (01):