Upload
bethanie-mills
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Imaging biomarkers and PACS ontologies
Bernard Gibaud
MediCIS, LTSI, U1099 InsermFaculté de médecine, Rennes
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
1
Goal of the presentation
• To highlight possibilities that future image data sharing infrastructures should provide to optimize the production, sharing, use and reuse if imaging biomarkers
2
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Overview
• Introduction (definition of imaging biomarkers)
• Part 1. Change of paradigm (led by imaging biomarkers)
• Part 2. Infrastructures for producing, sharing and using imaging biomarkers
• Part 3. Imaging biomarkers modeling using ontologies
• Conclusion 3
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Introduction
Definition
4
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers
5
Paper prepared by the ESR Subcommittee on Imaging Biomarkers (chairperson: Bernard Van Beers)
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers
• Definition of biomarkers (Atkinson 2001)*
– « characteristics that are objectively measured and evaluated as indicators of
• normal biological processes, • pathological processes, • pharmaceutical responses to a therapeutic intervention »
• Definition of (quantitative) imaging biomarkers– Derived from medical images– Quantitative, objective, reproducible– « qualified » for specific clinical uses
* Clin Pharmacol & Ther. 2001 Mar;69(3):89-95. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group.
6
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers
• Used for– Early detection of disease– Staging and grading– Predicting response to treatment– Assessing response to treatment
7
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers
• Of critical importance in research– Focused clinical research (e.g. controlled clinical
trials)– Translational research
• Link/correlate results obtained in various domains• Need to share them at a broad scale
Key aspect of federated imaging biobanks
• Of critical importance in individual patient management (decision criteria)– Diagnosis, prognosis, treatment Key aspect of a structured EHR / tasks planning
8
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
New paradigm led by imaging biomarkers
9
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
General framework
Reality
Human sujectAnimal subject
Specimenetc.
Acquisition
Images
MR imageCT image
PET imageetc.
Imaging biomarkers
Processing
Volume of anatomical structure
Fractal dimensionMean reg. blood
volumeLesion load (MS)
etc.
FactsPlans, etc.
Decision
Diagnosis of ADDiagnosis of MS
Resp to treatmentetc.
10
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Change of paradigm
• In many clinical situations, obtaining imaging biomarkers may become a primary goal of the imaging procedure
• The clinical goal (clinical question) determines what imaging biomarkers are needed
11
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Change of paradigm
Scientific question to be
answeredor
Clinical question
Set of required imaging
biomarkers
Decision
Detailed imagingprotocol
ProcessingAcquisition
Detailed subject/spec
imen preparation
12
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Consequence (1/2)
• Consensus building– What imaging biomarker in which situation– Conditions of image acquisition (acquisition protocol, image
reconstruction)– Precise definition of image processing
• Work in progress in RSNA’s QIBA initiative– Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance– QIBA Mission: « Improve the value and practicality of
quantitative biomarkers by reducing variability across devices, patients and time »
– Development of « profiles »13
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Consequence (2/2)
• Information modeling– Imaging biomarkers– As part of Structured Reports
• To be managed in clinical PACS and « clinical research supporting systems » – Intelligent task management systems (workflow)– Decision support systems– Quality management systems
14
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Part 2. Infrastructure for producing, sharing and using
imaging biomarkers
15
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Infrastructure for producing, sharing and using image biomarkers
• Two aspects– Data structures / information models– System infrastructure
• Two application domains– Care delivery / clinical routine– Clinical and translational research
16
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Data structures for imaging biomarkers
clinical application• Mostly
– Measurements included in free text reports– and results (e.g. of RECIST) available in
separated unstructured documents (e.g. pdf, DICOM secondary capture)
• Sometimes– Structured reports – DICOM structured reports
17
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Still often non-structured, because no subsequent automated processing
System infrastructures for imaging biomarkers
clinical application• Production of imaging biomarkers
– General purpose image processing software of PACS WS
– Specific software (plug-in, remote cloud server)
• Sharing of imaging biomarkers– PACS archive
• Use and re-use of imaging biomarkers– Mostly: human reading (e.g. clinician reading for
medical decision, radiologist reading for comparison with baseline)
18
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Limited automated reuse because not-structured
Data structures for imaging biomarkers
research application• Always
– Measurements in structured files / databases
• Entered via– Structured forms or eCRF (by end-user)– Structured document produced by image processing
software (specific XML structure, but also generic data structures, e.g. XCEDE*)
– DICOM structured reports (sometimes)• e.g. Quantitative Image Informatics in Cancer Research
(QIICR)
19
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Always structured because of subsequent automated processing (statistical analysis)
* XCEDE: XML-based Clinical and Experimental Data Exchange
System infrastructures for imaging biomarkers
research application
• Production of imaging biomarkers– Mostly: specific image processing software provided by CRO
(accessible as a web app in mono or multi-center studies)
• Sharing of imaging biomarkers– Clinical research system are often limited to collecting and
processing the results according to the study protocol– Sometimes, complementary « open image archives » (OIA)
to disseminate original and derived image data (e.g. ADNI, Human Connectome Project, Cancer Imaging Archive)
• Use and re-use of imaging biomarkers– Little reuse since data considered « non public »– OIA often limited to original image data, no online metadata-
based data query/retrieve
20
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Part 3. Imaging biomarkers modeling using ontologies
21
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Semantic web technologies
• Ontologies and ontology languages
• Ontology editors, e.g. Protégé (Stanford Univ.)
• Query languages, e.g. SPARQL (W3C recomm)
• Reasoners, e.g. FaCT++, Pellet, HermiT
22
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
23
Ontologies
• Definition (informatics and AI)– « a formal, explicit
specification of a shared conceptualization »
(Gruber 1993)
• Two basic aspects– A shared vocabulary– Formal semantics : axioms
expressed in a logical language
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
24
Formal semantics
• Definitions of classes of objects– Taxonomy of classes: subsumption (i.e. « is a » relation)– Instanciation (relation between an individual and a
class)
• Definitions of properties– Taxonomy of properties– Domain and range, inverse properties, etc.
• Processing by a reasoning engine– Assess satisfiability (consistency)– Classification of ontologies– Classification of instances
Reasoners are not application-specific
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Ontological modeling of imaging biomarkers
• Note: It is important to distinguish…– Imaging biomarker as result of a measurement– from its role in some medical decision (e.g.
diagnosis, prognostic)
• Main aspects an ontological model of biomarkers should address– Measure– Relation to reality– Provenance– Context
25
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers: measure
26
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Relies on long and deep experience in metrology
Imaging biomarkers: measure
• Is the result of some measurement process (manual or implemented in image processing software)
• Indirectly involves a physical object under study, and / or a process under study (dynamic process or longitudinal process) in which this object participates
• Concerns a specific quality of this object, or of the process under study)– Note: This quality may be a complex human construct (e.g.
model-based: fractal dimension, gyrification index)
• Values chosen from a predefined scale of measurement– interval, ratio, ordinal, nominal (categorical)
27
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers: relation to reality
• A Measurement of a quality beared by an object
• Or a Measurement of a temporal quality of the process under study
• (Simple) Examples– Volume of hippocampus (in cm3)– Speed of brain atrophy process – neuronal loss (in
cm3/year)– Mean Fractional Anisotropy over uncinate fasciculus
28
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers: provenance
• Execution of a program implementing some conceptual action (e.g., a segmentation)
• Resources used in this execution (e.g., user, date, software tool, platform)
• Input data (e.g., datasets, ROIs, imaging biomarkers)
• Input parameters (if any)
29
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Imaging biomarkers: context
• Case 1: Relation to a research question– Measurement process is part of the execution of
research protocol– Context is provided by the research goal and
protocol
• Case 2: Relation to a clinical question– Measurement process is part of the actions
performed to answer the clinical question (possibly detailed via a protocol, and/or a report template)
– Context is provided by the clinical question and associated clinical information
30
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Principal ontologies to start from
• Foundational ontologies: BFO or DOLCE– Provide a common modeling framework as well as the
major top-level entities
• Qualities: PATO• Provenance: PROV• Measurement and information artifacts: OBI / IAO• Imaging: RadLex• Imaging datasets: OntoNeuroLog• Imaging biomarkers: QIBO• Medicine in general: SNOMED, ICD, NCIT
31
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
But of inequal quality and completeness
Added value of ontologies for imaging biobanks (1)
• Standard vocabulary for images and imaging biomarkers, facilitating data sharing in large image repositories (imaging biobanks)
• More explicit and more formal representation, enabling – intelligent querying (SPARQL)
– rich inferencing capabilities implemented in generic (i.e. domain-agnostic) reasoners
32
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Added value of ontologies for imaging biobanks (2)
• Complementarity to existing infrastructures– e.g. a semantic implementation of imaging
biomarkers might complement regular DICOM SR files
– Possible implementation: RDF files accessible as a SPARQL endpoint
• Allows enhancing data sharing infrastructures with new and powerful search capabilities
33
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Agenda (1/2)
• Develop/extend the relevant domain ontologies– Needs to involve relevant domain experts
• the different radiological specialities• the DICOM standard community• the editors of major image processing packages
– as well as ontologists
difficult task
34
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Agenda (2/2)
• Deploy experimental systems in research infrastructures and imaging biobanks first.
• Then, consider deployment into clinical PACS, to support – Intelligent task management systems
(workflow)– Decision support systems– Quality management systems
35
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
36
Conclusion / Summary
• We underlined the importance of imaging biomarkers in research (both clinical and translational research) and care delivery
• We underlined the importance of structured reports as a convenient way to produce and share them for both research and clinical applications
• And finally we introduced ontologies and we discussed their added value in both imaging biobanks and clinical PACS
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)
Thank you for your attention
37
EuSoMII, 25 September 2014, Warsaw (Poland)