Cargando…

Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study

OBJECTIVES: Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been demonstrated to be efficient and cost-effective for cancer staging. The study aim was to develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm to improve radiologists' sensitivity and specificity for metastasis detection and reduce reading...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rockall, Andrea G., Li, Xingfeng, Johnson, Nicholas, Lavdas, Ioannis, Santhakumaran, Shalini, Prevost, A. Toby, Punwani, Shonit, Goh, Vicky, Barwick, Tara D., Bharwani, Nishat, Sandhu, Amandeep, Sidhu, Harbir, Plumb, Andrew, Burn, James, Fagan, Aisling, Wengert, Georg J., Koh, Dow-Mu, Reczko, Krystyna, Dou, Qi, Warwick, Jane, Liu, Xinxue, Messiou, Christina, Tunariu, Nina, Boavida, Peter, Soneji, Neil, Johnston, Edward W., Kelly-Morland, Christian, De Paepe, Katja N., Sokhi, Heminder, Wallitt, Kathryn, Lakhani, Amish, Russell, James, Salib, Miriam, Vinnicombe, Sarah, Haq, Adam, Aboagye, Eric O., Taylor, Stuart, Glocker, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10662596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37358356
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000996
_version_ 1785148570853179392
author Rockall, Andrea G.
Li, Xingfeng
Johnson, Nicholas
Lavdas, Ioannis
Santhakumaran, Shalini
Prevost, A. Toby
Punwani, Shonit
Goh, Vicky
Barwick, Tara D.
Bharwani, Nishat
Sandhu, Amandeep
Sidhu, Harbir
Plumb, Andrew
Burn, James
Fagan, Aisling
Wengert, Georg J.
Koh, Dow-Mu
Reczko, Krystyna
Dou, Qi
Warwick, Jane
Liu, Xinxue
Messiou, Christina
Tunariu, Nina
Boavida, Peter
Soneji, Neil
Johnston, Edward W.
Kelly-Morland, Christian
De Paepe, Katja N.
Sokhi, Heminder
Wallitt, Kathryn
Lakhani, Amish
Russell, James
Salib, Miriam
Vinnicombe, Sarah
Haq, Adam
Aboagye, Eric O.
Taylor, Stuart
Glocker, Ben
author_facet Rockall, Andrea G.
Li, Xingfeng
Johnson, Nicholas
Lavdas, Ioannis
Santhakumaran, Shalini
Prevost, A. Toby
Punwani, Shonit
Goh, Vicky
Barwick, Tara D.
Bharwani, Nishat
Sandhu, Amandeep
Sidhu, Harbir
Plumb, Andrew
Burn, James
Fagan, Aisling
Wengert, Georg J.
Koh, Dow-Mu
Reczko, Krystyna
Dou, Qi
Warwick, Jane
Liu, Xinxue
Messiou, Christina
Tunariu, Nina
Boavida, Peter
Soneji, Neil
Johnston, Edward W.
Kelly-Morland, Christian
De Paepe, Katja N.
Sokhi, Heminder
Wallitt, Kathryn
Lakhani, Amish
Russell, James
Salib, Miriam
Vinnicombe, Sarah
Haq, Adam
Aboagye, Eric O.
Taylor, Stuart
Glocker, Ben
author_sort Rockall, Andrea G.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been demonstrated to be efficient and cost-effective for cancer staging. The study aim was to develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm to improve radiologists' sensitivity and specificity for metastasis detection and reduce reading times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 438 prospectively collected WB-MRI scans from multicenter Streamline studies (February 2013–September 2016) was undertaken. Disease sites were manually labeled using Streamline reference standard. Whole-body MRI scans were randomly allocated to training and testing sets. A model for malignant lesion detection was developed based on convolutional neural networks and a 2-stage training strategy. The final algorithm generated lesion probability heat maps. Using a concurrent reader paradigm, 25 radiologists (18 experienced, 7 inexperienced in WB-/MRI) were randomly allocated WB-MRI scans with or without ML support to detect malignant lesions over 2 or 3 reading rounds. Reads were undertaken in the setting of a diagnostic radiology reading room between November 2019 and March 2020. Reading times were recorded by a scribe. Prespecified analysis included sensitivity, specificity, interobserver agreement, and reading time of radiology readers to detect metastases with or without ML support. Reader performance for detection of the primary tumor was also evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-three evaluable WB-MRI scans were allocated to algorithm training (245) or radiology testing (50 patients with metastases, from primary 117 colon [n = 117] or lung [n = 71] cancer). Among a total 562 reads by experienced radiologists over 2 reading rounds, per-patient specificity was 86.2% (ML) and 87.7% (non-ML) (−1.5% difference; 95% confidence interval [CI], −6.4%, 3.5%; P = 0.39). Sensitivity was 66.0% (ML) and 70.0% (non-ML) (−4.0% difference; 95% CI, −13.5%, 5.5%; P = 0.344). Among 161 reads by inexperienced readers, per-patient specificity in both groups was 76.3% (0% difference; 95% CI, −15.0%, 15.0%; P = 0.613), with sensitivity of 73.3% (ML) and 60.0% (non-ML) (13.3% difference; 95% CI, −7.9%, 34.5%; P = 0.313). Per-site specificity was high (>90%) for all metastatic sites and experience levels. There was high sensitivity for the detection of primary tumors (lung cancer detection rate of 98.6% with and without ML [0.0% difference; 95% CI, −2.0%, 2.0%; P = 1.00], colon cancer detection rate of 89.0% with and 90.6% without ML [−1.7% difference; 95% CI, −5.6%, 2.2%; P = 0.65]). When combining all reads from rounds 1 and 2, reading times fell by 6.2% (95% CI, −22.8%, 10.0%) when using ML. Round 2 read-times fell by 32% (95% CI, 20.8%, 42.8%) compared with round 1. Within round 2, there was a significant decrease in read-time when using ML support, estimated as 286 seconds (or 11%) quicker (P = 0.0281), using regression analysis to account for reader experience, read round, and tumor type. Interobserver variance suggests moderate agreement, Cohen κ = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (with ML), and Cohen κ = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (without ML). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a significant difference in per-patient sensitivity and specificity for detecting metastases or the primary tumor using concurrent ML compared with standard WB-MRI. Radiology read-times with or without ML support fell for round 2 reads compared with round 1, suggesting that readers familiarized themselves with the study reading method. During the second reading round, there was a significant reduction in reading time when using ML support.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10662596
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106625962023-11-21 Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study Rockall, Andrea G. Li, Xingfeng Johnson, Nicholas Lavdas, Ioannis Santhakumaran, Shalini Prevost, A. Toby Punwani, Shonit Goh, Vicky Barwick, Tara D. Bharwani, Nishat Sandhu, Amandeep Sidhu, Harbir Plumb, Andrew Burn, James Fagan, Aisling Wengert, Georg J. Koh, Dow-Mu Reczko, Krystyna Dou, Qi Warwick, Jane Liu, Xinxue Messiou, Christina Tunariu, Nina Boavida, Peter Soneji, Neil Johnston, Edward W. Kelly-Morland, Christian De Paepe, Katja N. Sokhi, Heminder Wallitt, Kathryn Lakhani, Amish Russell, James Salib, Miriam Vinnicombe, Sarah Haq, Adam Aboagye, Eric O. Taylor, Stuart Glocker, Ben Invest Radiol Original Article OBJECTIVES: Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been demonstrated to be efficient and cost-effective for cancer staging. The study aim was to develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm to improve radiologists' sensitivity and specificity for metastasis detection and reduce reading times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 438 prospectively collected WB-MRI scans from multicenter Streamline studies (February 2013–September 2016) was undertaken. Disease sites were manually labeled using Streamline reference standard. Whole-body MRI scans were randomly allocated to training and testing sets. A model for malignant lesion detection was developed based on convolutional neural networks and a 2-stage training strategy. The final algorithm generated lesion probability heat maps. Using a concurrent reader paradigm, 25 radiologists (18 experienced, 7 inexperienced in WB-/MRI) were randomly allocated WB-MRI scans with or without ML support to detect malignant lesions over 2 or 3 reading rounds. Reads were undertaken in the setting of a diagnostic radiology reading room between November 2019 and March 2020. Reading times were recorded by a scribe. Prespecified analysis included sensitivity, specificity, interobserver agreement, and reading time of radiology readers to detect metastases with or without ML support. Reader performance for detection of the primary tumor was also evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-three evaluable WB-MRI scans were allocated to algorithm training (245) or radiology testing (50 patients with metastases, from primary 117 colon [n = 117] or lung [n = 71] cancer). Among a total 562 reads by experienced radiologists over 2 reading rounds, per-patient specificity was 86.2% (ML) and 87.7% (non-ML) (−1.5% difference; 95% confidence interval [CI], −6.4%, 3.5%; P = 0.39). Sensitivity was 66.0% (ML) and 70.0% (non-ML) (−4.0% difference; 95% CI, −13.5%, 5.5%; P = 0.344). Among 161 reads by inexperienced readers, per-patient specificity in both groups was 76.3% (0% difference; 95% CI, −15.0%, 15.0%; P = 0.613), with sensitivity of 73.3% (ML) and 60.0% (non-ML) (13.3% difference; 95% CI, −7.9%, 34.5%; P = 0.313). Per-site specificity was high (>90%) for all metastatic sites and experience levels. There was high sensitivity for the detection of primary tumors (lung cancer detection rate of 98.6% with and without ML [0.0% difference; 95% CI, −2.0%, 2.0%; P = 1.00], colon cancer detection rate of 89.0% with and 90.6% without ML [−1.7% difference; 95% CI, −5.6%, 2.2%; P = 0.65]). When combining all reads from rounds 1 and 2, reading times fell by 6.2% (95% CI, −22.8%, 10.0%) when using ML. Round 2 read-times fell by 32% (95% CI, 20.8%, 42.8%) compared with round 1. Within round 2, there was a significant decrease in read-time when using ML support, estimated as 286 seconds (or 11%) quicker (P = 0.0281), using regression analysis to account for reader experience, read round, and tumor type. Interobserver variance suggests moderate agreement, Cohen κ = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (with ML), and Cohen κ = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47, 0.81 (without ML). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a significant difference in per-patient sensitivity and specificity for detecting metastases or the primary tumor using concurrent ML compared with standard WB-MRI. Radiology read-times with or without ML support fell for round 2 reads compared with round 1, suggesting that readers familiarized themselves with the study reading method. During the second reading round, there was a significant reduction in reading time when using ML support. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-12 2023-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10662596/ /pubmed/37358356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000996 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Rockall, Andrea G.
Li, Xingfeng
Johnson, Nicholas
Lavdas, Ioannis
Santhakumaran, Shalini
Prevost, A. Toby
Punwani, Shonit
Goh, Vicky
Barwick, Tara D.
Bharwani, Nishat
Sandhu, Amandeep
Sidhu, Harbir
Plumb, Andrew
Burn, James
Fagan, Aisling
Wengert, Georg J.
Koh, Dow-Mu
Reczko, Krystyna
Dou, Qi
Warwick, Jane
Liu, Xinxue
Messiou, Christina
Tunariu, Nina
Boavida, Peter
Soneji, Neil
Johnston, Edward W.
Kelly-Morland, Christian
De Paepe, Katja N.
Sokhi, Heminder
Wallitt, Kathryn
Lakhani, Amish
Russell, James
Salib, Miriam
Vinnicombe, Sarah
Haq, Adam
Aboagye, Eric O.
Taylor, Stuart
Glocker, Ben
Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
title Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
title_full Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
title_fullStr Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
title_full_unstemmed Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
title_short Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning in Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Metastases in Patients With Lung or Colon Cancer: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
title_sort development and evaluation of machine learning in whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for detecting metastases in patients with lung or colon cancer: a diagnostic test accuracy study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10662596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37358356
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000996
work_keys_str_mv AT rockallandreag developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT lixingfeng developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT johnsonnicholas developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT lavdasioannis developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT santhakumaranshalini developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT prevostatoby developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT punwanishonit developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT gohvicky developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT barwicktarad developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT bharwaninishat developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT sandhuamandeep developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT sidhuharbir developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT plumbandrew developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT burnjames developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT faganaisling developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT wengertgeorgj developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT kohdowmu developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT reczkokrystyna developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT douqi developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT warwickjane developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT liuxinxue developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT messiouchristina developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT tunariunina developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT boavidapeter developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT sonejineil developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT johnstonedwardw developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT kellymorlandchristian developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT depaepekatjan developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT sokhiheminder developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT wallittkathryn developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT lakhaniamish developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT russelljames developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT salibmiriam developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT vinnicombesarah developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT haqadam developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT aboagyeerico developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT taylorstuart developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy
AT glockerben developmentandevaluationofmachinelearninginwholebodymagneticresonanceimagingfordetectingmetastasesinpatientswithlungorcoloncanceradiagnostictestaccuracystudy