ESTRO 2022 - Abstract Book

S765

Abstract book

ESTRO 2022

in a directed graph (Figure 1). The edges of the graph represent the lymphatic drainage pathways, which are associated with probabilities of metastatic spread per abstract time step. These are the parameters of the HMM that are learned from the dataset of 287 patients.

Results Figure 2a) shows the predicted risk of microscopic metastases in contralateral LNL II depending on T-category, the extent of CT-observed macroscopic metastases, and midline extension as a risk factor. This risk is low (0.5 ± 0.3 %) for patients with early T-category (T1 & T2) tumors not extending over the midline with no clinically involved LNLs. However, it is significantly higher when the tumor is not lateralized, and we observe ipsilateral LNL II to be metastatic (7.2 ± 1.9 %). It further increases for late T-category (8.3 ± 2 %) and once more when the ipsilateral LNLs II, III and IV are clinically involved (10.3 ± 2.6 %). Figure 2b) shows the risk predicted for involvement in contralateral LNL III depending on the upstream level II.

Conclusion An HMM as probabilistic framework proves to be both flexible to expand and suitable for predicting the risk of microscopic involvement in a personalized manner. We can specify a patient by T-category, observed macroscopic involvement and the primary tumor’s midline extension to compute their risk for harboring microscopic metastases in any LNL recorded in the training cohort. Multi-institutional detailed datasets are however needed to validate the model’s accuracy. References:

[1] Biau (2019) Radiotherapy & Oncology 134 1-9 [2] Ludwig (2021) Scientific Reports 11 12261