Cargando…
Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT
INTRODUCTION: Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a disastrous complication of advanced malignancy. A deep learning (DL) algorithm for MSCC classification on CT could expedite timely diagnosis. In this study, we externally test a DL algorithm for MSCC classification on CT and compare with r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10193838/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37213273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1151073 |
_version_ | 1785043897396756480 |
---|---|
author | Hallinan, James Thomas Patrick Decourcy Zhu, Lei Zhang, Wenqiao Ge, Shuliang Muhamat Nor, Faimee Erwan Ong, Han Yang Eide, Sterling Ellis Cheng, Amanda J. L. Kuah, Tricia Lim, Desmond Shi Wei Low, Xi Zhen Yeong, Kuan Yuen AlMuhaish, Mona I. Alsooreti, Ahmed Mohamed Kumarakulasinghe, Nesaretnam Barr Teo, Ee Chin Yap, Qai Ven Chan, Yiong Huak Lin, Shuxun Tan, Jiong Hao Kumar, Naresh Vellayappan, Balamurugan A. Ooi, Beng Chin Quek, Swee Tian Makmur, Andrew |
author_facet | Hallinan, James Thomas Patrick Decourcy Zhu, Lei Zhang, Wenqiao Ge, Shuliang Muhamat Nor, Faimee Erwan Ong, Han Yang Eide, Sterling Ellis Cheng, Amanda J. L. Kuah, Tricia Lim, Desmond Shi Wei Low, Xi Zhen Yeong, Kuan Yuen AlMuhaish, Mona I. Alsooreti, Ahmed Mohamed Kumarakulasinghe, Nesaretnam Barr Teo, Ee Chin Yap, Qai Ven Chan, Yiong Huak Lin, Shuxun Tan, Jiong Hao Kumar, Naresh Vellayappan, Balamurugan A. Ooi, Beng Chin Quek, Swee Tian Makmur, Andrew |
author_sort | Hallinan, James Thomas Patrick Decourcy |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a disastrous complication of advanced malignancy. A deep learning (DL) algorithm for MSCC classification on CT could expedite timely diagnosis. In this study, we externally test a DL algorithm for MSCC classification on CT and compare with radiologist assessment. METHODS: Retrospective collection of CT and corresponding MRI from patients with suspected MSCC was conducted from September 2007 to September 2020. Exclusion criteria were scans with instrumentation, no intravenous contrast, motion artefacts and non-thoracic coverage. Internal CT dataset split was 84% for training/validation and 16% for testing. An external test set was also utilised. Internal training/validation sets were labelled by radiologists with spine imaging specialization (6 and 11-years post-board certification) and were used to further develop a DL algorithm for MSCC classification. The spine imaging specialist (11-years expertise) labelled the test sets (reference standard). For evaluation of DL algorithm performance, internal and external test data were independently reviewed by four radiologists: two spine specialists (Rad1 and Rad2, 7 and 5-years post-board certification, respectively) and two oncological imaging specialists (Rad3 and Rad4, 3 and 5-years post-board certification, respectively). DL model performance was also compared against the CT report issued by the radiologist in a real clinical setting. Inter-rater agreement (Gwet’s kappa) and sensitivity/specificity/AUCs were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 420 CT scans were evaluated (225 patients, mean age=60 ± 11.9[SD]); 354(84%) CTs for training/validation and 66(16%) CTs for internal testing. The DL algorithm showed high inter-rater agreement for three-class MSCC grading with kappas of 0.872 (p<0.001) and 0.844 (p<0.001) on internal and external testing, respectively. On internal testing DL algorithm inter-rater agreement (κ=0.872) was superior to Rad 2 (κ=0.795) and Rad 3 (κ=0.724) (both p<0.001). DL algorithm kappa of 0.844 on external testing was superior to Rad 3 (κ=0.721) (p<0.001). CT report classification of high-grade MSCC disease was poor with only slight inter-rater agreement (κ=0.027) and low sensitivity (44.0), relative to the DL algorithm with almost-perfect inter-rater agreement (κ=0.813) and high sensitivity (94.0) (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Deep learning algorithm for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT showed superior performance to the CT report issued by experienced radiologists and could aid earlier diagnosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10193838 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101938382023-05-19 Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT Hallinan, James Thomas Patrick Decourcy Zhu, Lei Zhang, Wenqiao Ge, Shuliang Muhamat Nor, Faimee Erwan Ong, Han Yang Eide, Sterling Ellis Cheng, Amanda J. L. Kuah, Tricia Lim, Desmond Shi Wei Low, Xi Zhen Yeong, Kuan Yuen AlMuhaish, Mona I. Alsooreti, Ahmed Mohamed Kumarakulasinghe, Nesaretnam Barr Teo, Ee Chin Yap, Qai Ven Chan, Yiong Huak Lin, Shuxun Tan, Jiong Hao Kumar, Naresh Vellayappan, Balamurugan A. Ooi, Beng Chin Quek, Swee Tian Makmur, Andrew Front Oncol Oncology INTRODUCTION: Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a disastrous complication of advanced malignancy. A deep learning (DL) algorithm for MSCC classification on CT could expedite timely diagnosis. In this study, we externally test a DL algorithm for MSCC classification on CT and compare with radiologist assessment. METHODS: Retrospective collection of CT and corresponding MRI from patients with suspected MSCC was conducted from September 2007 to September 2020. Exclusion criteria were scans with instrumentation, no intravenous contrast, motion artefacts and non-thoracic coverage. Internal CT dataset split was 84% for training/validation and 16% for testing. An external test set was also utilised. Internal training/validation sets were labelled by radiologists with spine imaging specialization (6 and 11-years post-board certification) and were used to further develop a DL algorithm for MSCC classification. The spine imaging specialist (11-years expertise) labelled the test sets (reference standard). For evaluation of DL algorithm performance, internal and external test data were independently reviewed by four radiologists: two spine specialists (Rad1 and Rad2, 7 and 5-years post-board certification, respectively) and two oncological imaging specialists (Rad3 and Rad4, 3 and 5-years post-board certification, respectively). DL model performance was also compared against the CT report issued by the radiologist in a real clinical setting. Inter-rater agreement (Gwet’s kappa) and sensitivity/specificity/AUCs were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 420 CT scans were evaluated (225 patients, mean age=60 ± 11.9[SD]); 354(84%) CTs for training/validation and 66(16%) CTs for internal testing. The DL algorithm showed high inter-rater agreement for three-class MSCC grading with kappas of 0.872 (p<0.001) and 0.844 (p<0.001) on internal and external testing, respectively. On internal testing DL algorithm inter-rater agreement (κ=0.872) was superior to Rad 2 (κ=0.795) and Rad 3 (κ=0.724) (both p<0.001). DL algorithm kappa of 0.844 on external testing was superior to Rad 3 (κ=0.721) (p<0.001). CT report classification of high-grade MSCC disease was poor with only slight inter-rater agreement (κ=0.027) and low sensitivity (44.0), relative to the DL algorithm with almost-perfect inter-rater agreement (κ=0.813) and high sensitivity (94.0) (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Deep learning algorithm for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT showed superior performance to the CT report issued by experienced radiologists and could aid earlier diagnosis. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10193838/ /pubmed/37213273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1151073 Text en Copyright © 2023 Hallinan, Zhu, Zhang, Ge, Muhamat Nor, Ong, Eide, Cheng, Kuah, Lim, Low, Yeong, AlMuhaish, Alsooreti, Kumarakulasinghe, Teo, Yap, Chan, Lin, Tan, Kumar, Vellayappan, Ooi, Quek and Makmur https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Hallinan, James Thomas Patrick Decourcy Zhu, Lei Zhang, Wenqiao Ge, Shuliang Muhamat Nor, Faimee Erwan Ong, Han Yang Eide, Sterling Ellis Cheng, Amanda J. L. Kuah, Tricia Lim, Desmond Shi Wei Low, Xi Zhen Yeong, Kuan Yuen AlMuhaish, Mona I. Alsooreti, Ahmed Mohamed Kumarakulasinghe, Nesaretnam Barr Teo, Ee Chin Yap, Qai Ven Chan, Yiong Huak Lin, Shuxun Tan, Jiong Hao Kumar, Naresh Vellayappan, Balamurugan A. Ooi, Beng Chin Quek, Swee Tian Makmur, Andrew Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT |
title | Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT |
title_full | Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT |
title_fullStr | Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT |
title_full_unstemmed | Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT |
title_short | Deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on CT |
title_sort | deep learning assessment compared to radiologist reporting for metastatic spinal cord compression on ct |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10193838/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37213273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1151073 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hallinanjamesthomaspatrickdecourcy deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT zhulei deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT zhangwenqiao deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT geshuliang deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT muhamatnorfaimeeerwan deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT onghanyang deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT eidesterlingellis deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT chengamandajl deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT kuahtricia deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT limdesmondshiwei deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT lowxizhen deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT yeongkuanyuen deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT almuhaishmonai deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT alsooretiahmedmohamed deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT kumarakulasinghenesaretnambarr deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT teoeechin deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT yapqaiven deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT chanyionghuak deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT linshuxun deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT tanjionghao deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT kumarnaresh deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT vellayappanbalamurugana deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT ooibengchin deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT queksweetian deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct AT makmurandrew deeplearningassessmentcomparedtoradiologistreportingformetastaticspinalcordcompressiononct |