21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Development and Validation of Deep Learning–based Automatic Detection Algorithm for Malignant Pulmonary Nodules on Chest Radiographs

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose To develop and validate a deep learning-based automatic detection algorithm (DLAD) for malignant pulmonary nodules on chest radiographs and to compare its performance with physicians including thoracic radiologists. Materials and Methods For this retrospective study, DLAD was developed by using 43 292 chest radiographs (normal radiograph-to-nodule radiograph ratio, 34 067:9225) in 34 676 patients (healthy-to-nodule ratio, 30 784:3892; 19 230 men [mean age, 52.8 years; age range, 18-99 years]; 15 446 women [mean age, 52.3 years; age range, 18-98 years]) obtained between 2010 and 2015, which were labeled and partially annotated by 13 board-certified radiologists, in a convolutional neural network. Radiograph classification and nodule detection performances of DLAD were validated by using one internal and four external data sets from three South Korean hospitals and one U.S. hospital. For internal and external validation, radiograph classification and nodule detection performances of DLAD were evaluated by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and jackknife alternative free-response receiver-operating characteristic (JAFROC) figure of merit (FOM), respectively. An observer performance test involving 18 physicians, including nine board-certified radiologists, was conducted by using one of the four external validation data sets. Performances of DLAD, physicians, and physicians assisted with DLAD were evaluated and compared. Results According to one internal and four external validation data sets, radiograph classification and nodule detection performances of DLAD were a range of 0.92-0.99 (AUROC) and 0.831-0.924 (JAFROC FOM), respectively. DLAD showed a higher AUROC and JAFROC FOM at the observer performance test than 17 of 18 and 15 of 18 physicians, respectively (P < .05), and all physicians showed improved nodule detection performances with DLAD (mean JAFROC FOM improvement, 0.043; range, 0.006-0.190; P < .05). Conclusion This deep learning-based automatic detection algorithm outperformed physicians in radiograph classification and nodule detection performance for malignant pulmonary nodules on chest radiographs, and it enhanced physicians' performances when used as a second reader. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review.

          Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease, resulting in a very low 5-year survival. Screening may reduce the risk of death from lung cancer. To conduct a systematic review of the evidence regarding the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). A multisociety collaborative initiative (involving the American Cancer Society, American College of Chest Physicians, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network) was undertaken to create the foundation for development of an evidence-based clinical guideline. MEDLINE (Ovid: January 1996 to April 2012), EMBASE (Ovid: January 1996 to April 2012), and the Cochrane Library (April 2012). Of 591 citations identified and reviewed, 8 randomized trials and 13 cohort studies of LDCT screening met criteria for inclusion. Primary outcomes were lung cancer mortality and all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes included nodule detection, invasive procedures, follow-up tests, and smoking cessation. Critical appraisal using predefined criteria was conducted on individual studies and the overall body of evidence. Differences in data extracted by reviewers were adjudicated by consensus. Three randomized studies provided evidence on the effect of LDCT screening on lung cancer mortality, of which the National Lung Screening Trial was the most informative, demonstrating that among 53,454 participants enrolled, screening resulted in significantly fewer lung cancer deaths (356 vs 443 deaths; lung cancer−specific mortality, 274 vs 309 events per 100,000 person-years for LDCT and control groups, respectively; relative risk, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93; absolute risk reduction, 0.33%; P = .004). The other 2 smaller studies showed no such benefit. In terms of potential harms of LDCT screening, across all trials and cohorts, approximately 20% of individuals in each round of screening had positive results requiring some degree of follow-up, while approximately 1% had lung cancer. There was marked heterogeneity in this finding and in the frequency of follow-up investigations, biopsies, and percentage of surgical procedures performed in patients with benign lesions. Major complications in those with benign conditions were rare. Low-dose computed tomography screening may benefit individuals at an increased risk for lung cancer, but uncertainty exists about the potential harms of screening and the generalizability of results.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Conference Proceedings: not found

            Lung Nodule Classification Using Deep Features in CT Images

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sensitivity and specificity of lung cancer screening using chest low-dose computed tomography

              Lung cancer screening programmes using chest X-ray and sputum cytology are routinely performed in Japan; however, the efficacy is insufficient. Screening using low-dose computed tomography (CT) is a more effective approach and has the potential to detect the disease more accurately. A total of 7183 low-dose CT screening tests for 4689 participants and 36 085 chest X-ray screening tests for 13 381 participants were conducted between August 1998 and May 2002. Sensitivity and specificity of lung cancer screening were calculated by both the detection method and the incidence method by linkage of the screening database and the Cancer Registry database. The preclinical detectable phase was assumed to be 1 year. Sensitivity and specificity by the detection method were 88.9 and 92.6% for low-dose CT and 78.3 and 97.0% for chest X-ray, respectively. Sensitivity of low-dose CT by the incidence method was 79.5%, whereas that of chest X-ray was 86.5%. Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT resulted in higher sensitivity and lower specificity than traditional screening according to the detection method. However, sensitivity by the incidence method was not as high as this. These findings demonstrate the potential for overdiagnosis in CT screening-detected cases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Radiology
                Radiology
                Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
                0033-8419
                1527-1315
                September 25 2018
                September 25 2018
                : 180237
                Article
                10.1148/radiol.2018180237
                30251934
                22ae5f11-b59d-4048-9e32-93c9d5b047f9
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article