Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34114064›Full record

ArticleNeuroradiology2021

Automated detection of brain metastases on non-enhanced CT using single-shot detectors.

Shimpei Kato, Shiori Amemiya, Hidemasa Takao, Hiroshi Yamashita, Naoya Sakamoto, Osamu Abe

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Shimpei KatoDepartment of Radiology, The Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7‑3‑1 Hongo, Bunkyo‑ku, Tokyo, 113‑8655, Japan.
Shiori AmemiyaDepartment of Radiology, The Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7‑3‑1 Hongo, Bunkyo‑ku, Tokyo, 113‑8655, Japan. amemiya-tky@umin.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2132-1642
Hidemasa TakaoDepartment of Radiology, The Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7‑3‑1 Hongo, Bunkyo‑ku, Tokyo, 113‑8655, Japan.
Hiroshi YamashitaDepartment of Radiology, Teikyo University Hospital, Mizonokuchi, 5-1-1 Futago, Takatsu-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, 213-8507, Japan.
Naoya SakamotoDepartment of Radiology, The Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7‑3‑1 Hongo, Bunkyo‑ku, Tokyo, 113‑8655, Japan.
Osamu AbeDepartment of Radiology, The Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7‑3‑1 Hongo, Bunkyo‑ku, Tokyo, 113‑8655, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop and investigate deep learning-based detectors for brain metastases detection on non-enhanced (NE) CT.

methodsThe study included 116 NECTs from 116 patients (81 men, age 66.5 ± 10.6 years) to train and test single-shot detector (SSD) models using 89 and 27 cases, respectively. The annotation was performed by three radiologists using bounding-boxes defined on contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) images. NECTs were coregistered and resliced to CECTs. The detection performance was evaluated at the SSD's 50% confidence threshold using sensitivity, positive-predictive value (PPV), and the false-positive rate per scan (FPR). For false negatives and true positives, binary logistic regression was used to examine the possible contributing factors.

resultsFor lesions 6 mm or larger, the SSD achieved a sensitivity of 35.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): [32.3%, 33.5%]); 51/144) with an FPR of 14.9 (95% CI [12.4, 13.9]). The overall sensitivity was 23.8% (95% CI: [21.3%, 22.8%]; 55/231) and PPV was 19.1% (95% CI: [18.5%, 20.4%]; 98/ of 513), with an FPR of 15.4 (95% CI [12.9, 14.5]). Ninety-five percent of the lesions that SSD failed to detect were also undetectable to radiologists (168/176). Twenty-four percent of the lesions (13/50) detected by the SSD were undetectable to radiologists. Logistic regression analysis indicated that density, necrosis, and size contributed to the lesions' visibility for radiologists, while for the SSD, the surrounding edema also enhanced the detection performance.

conclusionThe SSD model we developed could detect brain metastases larger than 6 mm to some extent, a quarter of which were even retrospectively unrecognizable to radiologists.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedBrain metastasesComputed tomographyDeep learningSingle-shot detectors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.