Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39437009›Full record

ArticleInvestigative radiology2025

Significance of Image Reconstruction Parameters for Future Lung Cancer Risk Prediction Using Low-Dose Chest Computed Tomography and the Open-Access Sybil Algorithm.

Judit Simon, Peter Mikhael, Alexander Graur, Allison E B Chang, Steven J Skates, Raymond U Osarogiagbon, Lecia V Sequist, Florian J Fintelmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

8 authors.

Judit SimonFrom the Division of Thoracic Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (J.S., A.G., F.J.F.); Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (J.S., A.E.B.C., S.J.S., L.V.S., F.J.F.); Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA (P.M.); Jameel Clinic, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA (P.M.); Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (A.E.B.C., L.V.S.); Department of Medicine, MGH Biostatistics, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston MA (S.J.S.); and Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Program, Baptist Cancer Center, Memphis, TN (R.U.O.).
Peter Mikhael
Alexander Graur
Allison E B Chang
Steven J Skates
Raymond U Osarogiagbon
Lecia V Sequist
Florian J FintelmannORCID 0000-0002-0119-3903

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSybil is a validated publicly available deep learning-based algorithm that can accurately predict lung cancer risk from a single low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scan. We aimed to study the effect of image reconstruction parameters and CT scanner manufacturer on Sybil's performance. MATERIALS AND

methodsUsing LDCTs of a subset of the National Lung Screening Trial participants, which we previously used for internal validation of the Sybil algorithm (test set), we ran the Sybil algorithm on LDCT series pairs matched on kilovoltage peak, milliampere-seconds, reconstruction interval, reconstruction diameter, and either reconstruction filter or axial slice thickness. We also evaluated the cumulative effect of these parameters by combining the best- and the worst-performing parameters. A subanalysis compared Sybil's performance by CT manufacturer. We considered any LDCT positive if future lung cancer was subsequently confirmed by biopsy or surgical resection. The areas under the curve (AUCs) for each series pair were compared using DeLong's test.

resultsThere was no difference in Sybil's performance between 1049 pairs of standard versus bone reconstruction filter (AUC at 1 year 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.99] vs 0.86 [95% CI: 0.75-0.98], P = 0.87) and 1961 pairs of standard versus lung reconstruction filter (AUC at 1 year 0.98 [95% CI: 0.97-0.99] vs 0.98 [95% CI: 0.96-0.99], P = 0.81). Similarly, there was no difference in 1288 pairs comparing 2-mm versus 5-mm axial slice thickness (AUC at 1 year 0.98 [95% CI: 0.94-1.00] vs 0.99 [95% CI: 0.97-0.99], P = 0.68). The best-case scenario combining a lung reconstruction filter with 2-mm slice thickness compared with the worst-case scenario combining a bone reconstruction filter with 2.5-mm slice thickness uncovered a significantly different performance at years 2-4 ( P = 0.03). Subanalysis showed no significant difference in performance between Siemens and Toshiba scanners.

conclusionsSybil's predictive performance for future lung cancer risk is robust across different reconstruction filters and axial slice thicknesses, demonstrating its versatility in various imaging settings. Combining favorable reconstruction parameters can significantly enhance predictive ability at years 2-4. The absence of significant differences between Siemens and Toshiba scanners further supports Sybil's versatility.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDeep LearningLung NeoplasmsRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRisk Assessmentartificial intelligencecancer screeningdeep learningearly detection of cancerlung cancer

Identifiers

PMID39437009
PMCPMC12129392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.