Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35110367›Full record

ArticleThorax2022

Fully automated volumetric measurement of malignant pleural mesothelioma by deep learning AI: validation and comparison with modified RECIST response criteria.

Andrew C Kidd, Owen Anderson, Gordon W Cowell, Alexander J Weir, Jeremy P Voisey, Matthew Evison, Selina Tsim, Keith A Goatman, Kevin G Blyth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Thorax, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Artificial intelligence for response prediction and personalisation in radiation oncology.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Contemporary management of mesothelioma.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2024
    Review
  15. Imaging of pleural disease.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors.

Andrew C KiddGlasgow Pleural Disease Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Owen AndersonSchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Gordon W CowellDepartment of Imaging, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Alexander J WeirCanon Medical Research Europe Ltd, Edinburgh, UK.
Jeremy P VoiseyCanon Medical Research Europe Ltd, Edinburgh, UK.
Matthew EvisonDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospital of South Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Selina TsimGlasgow Pleural Disease Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Keith A GoatmanCanon Medical Research Europe Ltd, Edinburgh, UK.
Kevin G BlythGlasgow Pleural Disease Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK Kevin.Blyth@glasgow.ac.uk.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 29372Chief Scientist Office ETM/285
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), complex tumour morphology results in inconsistent radiological response assessment. Promising volumetric methods require automation to be practical. We developed a fully automated Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) for this purpose, performed blinded validation and compared CNN and human response classification and survival prediction in patients treated with chemotherapy.

methodsIn a multicentre retrospective cohort study; 183 CT datasets were split into training and internal validation (123 datasets (80 fully annotated); 108 patients; 1 centre) and external validation (60 datasets (all fully annotated); 30 patients; 3 centres). Detailed manual annotations were used to train the CNN, which used two-dimensional U-Net architecture. CNN performance was evaluated using correlation, Bland-Altman and Dice agreement. Volumetric response/progression were defined as ≤30%/≥20% change and compared with modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (mRECIST) by Cohen's kappa. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methodology.

resultsHuman and artificial intelligence (AI) volumes were strongly correlated (validation set r=0.851, p<0.0001). Agreement was strong (validation set mean bias +31 cm

conclusionWe have developed and validated the first fully automated CNN for volumetric MPM segmentation. CNN performance may be further improved by enriching future training sets with morphologically challenging features. Volumetric response thresholds require further calibration in future studies.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMesotheliomaMesothelioma, MalignantPleural NeoplasmsArtificial IntelligenceHumansResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsRetrospective Studiesimaging/CT MRImesotheliomapleural disease

Identifiers

PMID35110367
PMCPMC9685726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.