Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most malignant form of primary brain tumors known as gliomas. They proliferate and invade extensively and yield short life expectancies despite aggressive treatment. Response to treatment is usually measured in terms of survival of groups of patients treated similarly but this statistical approach misses the subgroups that may have responded to or may have been injured by treatment. Such statistics offer scant reassurance to individual patients who have suffered through these treatments. Furthermore, current imaging-based treatment response metrics in individual patients ignore patient-specific differences in tumor growth kinetics, which have been shown to vary widely across patients even within the same histological diagnosis and, unfortunately, these metrics have shown only minimal success in predicting patient outcome. We consider nine newly diagnosed GBM patients receiving diagnostic biopsy followed by standard of care external beam radiation therapy (XRT). We present and apply a patient-specific, biologically-based mathematical model for glioma growth that quantifies response to XRT in individual patients in vivo. The mathematical model uses net rates of proliferation and migration of malignant tumor cells to characterize the tumor’s growth and invasion along with the linear-quadratic model for the response to radiation therapy. Using only routinely available pre-treatment MRIs to inform the patient-specific bio-mathematical model simulations, we find that radiation response in these patients, quantified by both clinical and model-generated measures, could have been predicted prior to treatment with high accuracy. Specifically, we find the net proliferation rate is correlated with the radiation response parameter (r = 0.89, p = 0.0007), resulting in a predictive relationship that is tested with a leave-one-out cross validation technique. This relationship predicts the tumor size post therapy to within inter-observer tumor volume uncertainty. The results of this study suggest that a mathematical model can create a virtual in silico tumor with the same growth kinetics as a particular patient and can not only predict treatment response in individual patients in vivo but also provide a basis for evaluation of response in each patient to any given therapy.

The AMIA biomedical informatics (BMI) core competencies have been designed to support and guide graduate education in BMI, the core scientific discipline underlying the breadth of the field's research, practice, and education. The core definition of BMI adopted by AMIA specifies that BMI is 'the interdisciplinary field that studies and pursues the effective uses of biomedical data, information, and knowledge for scientific inquiry, problem solving and decision making, motivated by efforts to improve human health.' Application areas range from bioinformatics to clinical and public health informatics and span the spectrum from the molecular to population levels of health and biomedicine. The shared core informatics competencies of BMI draw on the practical experience of many specific informatics sub-disciplines. The AMIA BMI analysis highlights the central shared set of competencies that should guide curriculum design and that graduate students should be expected to master.

Objective-The prognosis of cancer patients treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is inherently uncertain, depends on many decision variables, and requires that a physician balance competing objectives: maximum tumor control with minimal treatment complications.Methods-In order to better deal with the complex and multiple objective nature of the problem we have combined a prognostic probabilistic model with multi-attribute decision theory which incorporates patient preferences for outcomes.Results-The response to IMRT for prostate cancer was modeled. A Bayesian network was used for prognosis for each treatment plan. Prognoses included predicting local tumor control, regional spread, distant metastases, and normal tissue complications resulting from treatment. A Markov model was constructed and used to calculate a quality-adjusted life-expectancy which aids in the multi-attribute decision process.Conclusions-Our method makes explicit the tradeoffs patients face between quality and quantity of life. This approach has advantages over current approaches because with our approach risks of health outcomes and patient preferences determine treatment decisions.

The purpose is to incorporate clinically relevant factors such as patient-specific and dosimetric information as well as data from clinical trials in the decision-making process for the selection of prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans. The approach is to incorporate the decision theoretic concept of an influence diagram into the solution of the multiobjective optimization inverse planning problem. A set of candidate IMRT plans was obtained by varying the importance factors for the planning target volume (PTV) and the organ-at-risk (OAR) in combination with simulated annealing to explore a large part of the solution space. The Pareto set for the PTV and OAR was analysed to demonstrate how the selection of the weighting factors influenced which part of the solution space was explored. An influence diagram based on a Bayesian network with 18 nodes was designed to model the decision process for plan selection. The model possessed nodes for clinical laboratory results, tumour grading, staging information, patient-specific information, dosimetric information, complications and survival statistics from clinical studies. A utility node was utilized for the decision-making process. The influence diagram successfully ranked the plans based on the available information. Sensitivity analyses were used to judge the reasonableness of the diagram and the results. In conclusion, influence diagrams lend themselves well to modelling the decision processes for IMRT plan selection. They provide an excellent means to incorporate the probabilistic nature of data and beliefs into one model. They also provide a means for introducing evidence-based medicine, in the form of results of clinical trials, into the decision-making process.