Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 4, 2025
Quantifying the Brain Metastatic Tumor Micro-Environment using an Organ-On-A Chip 3D Model, Machine Learning, and Confocal Tomography
Published on: August 16, 2020
A prospective study comparing highly qualified Molecular Tumor Boards with AI-powered software as a medical device
Hideaki Bando1,2,3, Yoichi Naito4, Tomoyuki Yamada5
1Translational Research Support Office, Division of Drug and Diagnostic Development Promotion, Department for the Promotion of Drug and Diagnostic Development, National Cancer Center Hospital East, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, 277-8577, Japan.
Background:
The implementation of cancer precision medicine in Japan is deeply intertwined with insurance reimbursement policies and requires case-by-case reviews by Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs), which impose considerable operational burdens on healthcare facilities. The extensive preparation and review times required by MTBs hinder their ability to efficiently assess comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) test results. Despite attempts to optimize MTB operations, significant challenges remain. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of QA Commons, an artificial intelligence-driven system designed to improve treatment planning using CGP analysis. QA Commons utilizes a comprehensive knowledge base of drugs, regulatory approvals, and clinical trials linked to genetic biomarkers, thereby enabling the delivery of consistent and standardized treatment recommendations. Initial assessments revealed that the QA Commons' recommendations closely matched the ideal treatment recommendations (consensus annotations), outperforming the average results of MTBs at Cancer Genomic Medicine Core Hospitals.
Methods:
A clinical performance evaluation study will be conducted by comparing the QA Commons' treatment recommendations with those of the Academia Assembly, which includes medical professionals from the Cancer Genomic Medicine Core and Hub Hospitals. One hundred cases selected from the "Registry of the Academia Assembly," based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, will be analyzed to assess the concordance of recommendations.
Conclusion:
The expected outcomes suggest that QA Commons could reduce the workload of MTB members, standardize the quality of MTB discussions, and provide consistent outcomes in repeated patient consultations. In addition, the global expansion of QA Commons could promote worldwide adoption of Japan's pioneering precision oncology system.
