Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34162439›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2021

Deep learning for semi-automated unidirectional measurement of lung tumor size in CT.

MinJae Woo, A Michael Devane, Steven C Lowe, Ervin L Lowther, Ronald W Gimbel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Semiautomated pelvic lymph node treatment response evaluation for patients with advanced prostate cancer: based on MET-RADS-P guidelines.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023
    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

5 authors.

MinJae WooDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, 501 Edwards Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA.
A Michael DevaneDepartment of Radiology, Prisma Health System, 200 Patewood Drive, Greenville, SC, 29615, USA.
Steven C LoweDepartment of Radiology, Prisma Health System, 200 Patewood Drive, Greenville, SC, 29615, USA.
Ervin L LowtherDepartment of Radiology, Prisma Health System, 200 Patewood Drive, Greenville, SC, 29615, USA.
Ronald W GimbelDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, 501 Edwards Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA. rgimbel@clemson.edu.

Funding

Prisma Health System (US) 2015001097
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerforming Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECISTS) measurement is a non-trivial task requiring much expertise and time. A deep learning-based algorithm has the potential to assist with rapid and consistent lesion measurement. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate deep learning (DL) algorithm for semi-automated unidirectional CT measurement of lung lesions.

methodsThis retrospective study included 1617 lung CT images from 8 publicly open datasets. A convolutional neural network was trained using 1373 training and validation images annotated by two radiologists. Performance of the DL algorithm was evaluated 244 test images annotated by one radiologist. DL algorithm's measurement consistency with human radiologist was evaluated using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plotting. Bonferroni's method was used to analyze difference in their diagnostic behavior, attributed by tumor characteristics. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

resultsThe DL algorithm yielded ICC score of 0.959 with human radiologist. Bland-Altman plotting suggested 240 (98.4 %) measurements realized within the upper and lower limits of agreement (LOA). Some measurements outside the LOA revealed difference in clinical reasoning between DL algorithm and human radiologist. Overall, the algorithm marginally overestimated the size of lesion by 2.97 % compared to human radiologists. Further investigation indicated tumor characteristics may be associated with the DL algorithm's diagnostic behavior of over or underestimating the lesion size compared to human radiologist.

conclusionsThe DL algorithm for unidirectional measurement of lung tumor size demonstrated excellent agreement with human radiologist.

Indexed as

AgedDeep LearningFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedDeep learningLung CancerResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1Semi-automated annotationTumor Measurement

Identifiers

PMID34162439
PMCPMC8220702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.