Cargando…

Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis

Background & Aims: Gastric cancer is the common malignancies from cancer worldwide. Endoscopy is currently the most effective method to detect early gastric cancer (EGC). However, endoscopy is not infallible and EGC can be missed during endoscopy. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted endoscopic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiang, Kailin, Jiang, Xiaotao, Pan, Jinglin, Wen, Yi, Huang, Yuanchen, Weng, Senhui, Lan, Shaoyang, Nie, Kechao, Zheng, Zhihua, Ji, Shuling, Liu, Peng, Li, Peiwu, Liu, Fengbin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8005567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33791323
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.629080
_version_ 1783672135420477440
author Jiang, Kailin
Jiang, Xiaotao
Pan, Jinglin
Wen, Yi
Huang, Yuanchen
Weng, Senhui
Lan, Shaoyang
Nie, Kechao
Zheng, Zhihua
Ji, Shuling
Liu, Peng
Li, Peiwu
Liu, Fengbin
author_facet Jiang, Kailin
Jiang, Xiaotao
Pan, Jinglin
Wen, Yi
Huang, Yuanchen
Weng, Senhui
Lan, Shaoyang
Nie, Kechao
Zheng, Zhihua
Ji, Shuling
Liu, Peng
Li, Peiwu
Liu, Fengbin
author_sort Jiang, Kailin
collection PubMed
description Background & Aims: Gastric cancer is the common malignancies from cancer worldwide. Endoscopy is currently the most effective method to detect early gastric cancer (EGC). However, endoscopy is not infallible and EGC can be missed during endoscopy. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted endoscopic diagnosis is a recent hot spot of research. We aimed to quantify the diagnostic value of AI-assisted endoscopy in diagnosing EGC. Method: The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library Databases were searched for articles on AI-assisted endoscopy application in EGC diagnosis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated, and the endoscopists' diagnostic value was evaluated for comparison. The subgroup was set according to endoscopy modality, and number of training images. A funnel plot was delineated to estimate the publication bias. Result: 16 studies were included in this study. We indicated that the application of AI in endoscopic detection of EGC achieved an AUC of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.94–0.97), a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI, 77–92%), and a specificity of 93% (95% CI, 89–96%). In AI-assisted EGC depth diagnosis, the AUC was 0.82(95% CI, 0.78–0.85), and the pooled sensitivity and specificity was 0.72(95% CI, 0.58–0.82) and 0.79(95% CI, 0.56–0.92). The funnel plot showed no publication bias. Conclusion: The AI applications for EGC diagnosis seemed to be more accurate than the endoscopists. AI assisted EGC diagnosis was more accurate than experts. More prospective studies are needed to make AI-aided EGC diagnosis universal in clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8005567
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80055672021-03-30 Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis Jiang, Kailin Jiang, Xiaotao Pan, Jinglin Wen, Yi Huang, Yuanchen Weng, Senhui Lan, Shaoyang Nie, Kechao Zheng, Zhihua Ji, Shuling Liu, Peng Li, Peiwu Liu, Fengbin Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine Background & Aims: Gastric cancer is the common malignancies from cancer worldwide. Endoscopy is currently the most effective method to detect early gastric cancer (EGC). However, endoscopy is not infallible and EGC can be missed during endoscopy. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted endoscopic diagnosis is a recent hot spot of research. We aimed to quantify the diagnostic value of AI-assisted endoscopy in diagnosing EGC. Method: The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library Databases were searched for articles on AI-assisted endoscopy application in EGC diagnosis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated, and the endoscopists' diagnostic value was evaluated for comparison. The subgroup was set according to endoscopy modality, and number of training images. A funnel plot was delineated to estimate the publication bias. Result: 16 studies were included in this study. We indicated that the application of AI in endoscopic detection of EGC achieved an AUC of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.94–0.97), a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI, 77–92%), and a specificity of 93% (95% CI, 89–96%). In AI-assisted EGC depth diagnosis, the AUC was 0.82(95% CI, 0.78–0.85), and the pooled sensitivity and specificity was 0.72(95% CI, 0.58–0.82) and 0.79(95% CI, 0.56–0.92). The funnel plot showed no publication bias. Conclusion: The AI applications for EGC diagnosis seemed to be more accurate than the endoscopists. AI assisted EGC diagnosis was more accurate than experts. More prospective studies are needed to make AI-aided EGC diagnosis universal in clinical practice. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8005567/ /pubmed/33791323 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.629080 Text en Copyright © 2021 Jiang, Jiang, Pan, Wen, Huang, Weng, Lan, Nie, Zheng, Ji, Liu, Li and Liu. 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 Medicine
Jiang, Kailin
Jiang, Xiaotao
Pan, Jinglin
Wen, Yi
Huang, Yuanchen
Weng, Senhui
Lan, Shaoyang
Nie, Kechao
Zheng, Zhihua
Ji, Shuling
Liu, Peng
Li, Peiwu
Liu, Fengbin
Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis
title Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis
title_full Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis
title_short Current Evidence and Future Perspective of Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Application for Early Gastric Cancer Diagnosis With Endoscopy: A Systematic and Meta-Analysis
title_sort current evidence and future perspective of accuracy of artificial intelligence application for early gastric cancer diagnosis with endoscopy: a systematic and meta-analysis
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8005567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33791323
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.629080
work_keys_str_mv AT jiangkailin currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT jiangxiaotao currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT panjinglin currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT wenyi currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT huangyuanchen currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT wengsenhui currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT lanshaoyang currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT niekechao currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT zhengzhihua currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT jishuling currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT liupeng currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT lipeiwu currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis
AT liufengbin currentevidenceandfutureperspectiveofaccuracyofartificialintelligenceapplicationforearlygastriccancerdiagnosiswithendoscopyasystematicandmetaanalysis