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

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Judit Simon, Peter Mikhael, Alexander Graur, Allison E B Chang, Steven J Skates, Raymond U Osarogiagbon, Lecia V Sequist, Florian J Fintelmann
{"title":"Significance of Image Reconstruction Parameters for Future Lung Cancer Risk Prediction Using Low-Dose Chest Computed Tomography and the Open-Access Sybil Algorithm.","authors":"Judit Simon, Peter Mikhael, Alexander Graur, Allison E B Chang, Steven J Skates, Raymond U Osarogiagbon, Lecia V Sequist, Florian J Fintelmann","doi":"10.1097/RLI.0000000000001131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Sybil 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.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sybil'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.</p>","PeriodicalId":14486,"journal":{"name":"Investigative Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigative Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000001131","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Sybil 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 methods: Using 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.

Results: There 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.

Conclusions: Sybil'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.

使用低剂量胸部计算机断层扫描和开放式 Sybil 算法进行未来肺癌风险预测时图像重建参数的意义。
目的:Sybil是一种经过验证、公开可用的基于深度学习的算法,它可以通过单次低剂量计算机断层扫描(LDCT)准确预测肺癌风险。我们旨在研究图像重建参数和 CT 扫描仪制造商对 Sybil 性能的影响:我们使用国家肺部筛查试验参与者子集的 LDCT(测试集),在千伏峰值、毫安秒、重建间隔、重建直径、重建滤波器或轴向切片厚度匹配的 LDCT 系列对上运行 Sybil 算法。我们还通过合并表现最好和最差的参数来评估这些参数的累积效应。一项子分析比较了不同 CT 生产商的 Sybil 性能。如果随后通过活检或手术切除确诊为肺癌,我们则认为任何 LDCT 均为阳性。使用 DeLong 检验比较了每对系列的曲线下面积(AUC):1049对标准过滤器与骨重建过滤器(1年后的AUC为0.84 [95% 置信区间(CI):0.70-0.99] vs 0.86 [95% CI:0.75-0.98],P = 0.87)和1961对标准过滤器与肺重建过滤器(1年后的AUC为0.98 [95% CI:0.97-0.99] vs 0.98 [95% CI:0.96-0.99],P = 0.81)的Sybil性能没有差异。同样,在 1288 对患者中,2 毫米与 5 毫米轴向切片厚度比较没有差异(1 年时 AUC 0.98 [95% CI: 0.94-1.00] vs 0.99 [95% CI: 0.97-0.99], P = 0.68)。在最佳情况下,将肺重建滤波器与2毫米切片厚度相结合,而在最坏情况下,将骨重建滤波器与2.5毫米切片厚度相结合,结果发现在2-4年时,两者的表现有显著差异(P = 0.03)。子分析表明,西门子和东芝扫描仪的性能无明显差异:Sybil对未来肺癌风险的预测性能在不同的重建滤波器和轴向切片厚度下都很稳定,这证明了它在各种成像环境下的通用性。结合有利的重建参数可显著提高 2-4 年的预测能力。西门子和东芝扫描仪之间没有明显差异,这进一步证明了Sybil的多功能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Investigative Radiology
Investigative Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
16.40%
发文量
188
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Investigative Radiology publishes original, peer-reviewed reports on clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, and related modalities. Emphasis is on early and timely publication. Primarily research-oriented, the journal also includes a wide variety of features of interest to clinical radiologists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信