卵巢-附件报告和数据系统(O-RADS)核磁共振成像评分:诊断准确性、观察者之间的一致性以及对机器学习的适用性。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Hüseyin Akkaya, Emin Demirel, Okan Dilek, Tuba Dalgalar Akkaya, Turgay Öztürkçü, Kübra Karaaslan Erişen, Zeynel Abidin Tas, Sevda Bas, Bozkurt Gülek
{"title":"卵巢-附件报告和数据系统(O-RADS)核磁共振成像评分:诊断准确性、观察者之间的一致性以及对机器学习的适用性。","authors":"Hüseyin Akkaya, Emin Demirel, Okan Dilek, Tuba Dalgalar Akkaya, Turgay Öztürkçü, Kübra Karaaslan Erişen, Zeynel Abidin Tas, Sevda Bas, Bozkurt Gülek","doi":"10.1093/bjr/tqae221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy of ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system magnetic resonance imaging (O-RADS MRI) and applicability to machine learning.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Dynamic contrast-enhanced pelvic MRI examinations 471 lesions were retrospectively analyzed and assessed by three radiologists according to O-RADS MRI criteria. Radiomic data were extracted from T2, and post-contrast fat-suppressed T1-weighted images. Using these data, an artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine, random forest, and naive Bayes models were constructed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among all readers, the lowest agreement was found for the O-RADS 4 group (kappa: 0.669 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.634-0.733)), followed by the O-RADS 5 group (kappa: 0.709 (95% CI 0.678-0.754)). O-RADS 4 predicted a malignancy with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 74.3% (95% CI 0.701-0.782), and O-RADS 5 with an AUC of 95.5% (95% CI 0.932-0.972),(p < 0.001). Among the machine learning models, ANN achieved the highest success, distinguishing O-RADS groups with an AUC of 0.948, a precision of 0.861, and a recall of 0.824.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The interobserver agreement and diagnostic sensitivity of the O-RADS MRI in assigning O-RADS 4-5 were not perfect, indicating a need for structural improvement. Integrating artificial intelligence into MRI protocols may enhance their performance.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>Machine learning can achieve high accuracy in the correct classification of O-RADS MRI. Malignancy prediction rates were 74% for O-RADS 4 and 95% for O-RADS 5.</p>","PeriodicalId":9306,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) MRI Scoring: Diagnostic Accuracy, Interobserver Agreement, and Applicability to Machine Learning.\",\"authors\":\"Hüseyin Akkaya, Emin Demirel, Okan Dilek, Tuba Dalgalar Akkaya, Turgay Öztürkçü, Kübra Karaaslan Erişen, Zeynel Abidin Tas, Sevda Bas, Bozkurt Gülek\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjr/tqae221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy of ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system magnetic resonance imaging (O-RADS MRI) and applicability to machine learning.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Dynamic contrast-enhanced pelvic MRI examinations 471 lesions were retrospectively analyzed and assessed by three radiologists according to O-RADS MRI criteria. Radiomic data were extracted from T2, and post-contrast fat-suppressed T1-weighted images. Using these data, an artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine, random forest, and naive Bayes models were constructed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among all readers, the lowest agreement was found for the O-RADS 4 group (kappa: 0.669 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.634-0.733)), followed by the O-RADS 5 group (kappa: 0.709 (95% CI 0.678-0.754)). O-RADS 4 predicted a malignancy with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 74.3% (95% CI 0.701-0.782), and O-RADS 5 with an AUC of 95.5% (95% CI 0.932-0.972),(p < 0.001). Among the machine learning models, ANN achieved the highest success, distinguishing O-RADS groups with an AUC of 0.948, a precision of 0.861, and a recall of 0.824.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The interobserver agreement and diagnostic sensitivity of the O-RADS MRI in assigning O-RADS 4-5 were not perfect, indicating a need for structural improvement. Integrating artificial intelligence into MRI protocols may enhance their performance.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>Machine learning can achieve high accuracy in the correct classification of O-RADS MRI. Malignancy prediction rates were 74% for O-RADS 4 and 95% for O-RADS 5.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae221\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae221","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估卵巢-附件报告和数据系统磁共振成像(O-RADS MRI)的观察者间一致性和诊断准确性以及机器学习的适用性:由三位放射科医师根据 O-RADS MRI 标准对 471 个动态对比增强盆腔 MRI 检查病灶进行回顾性分析和评估。从 T2 和对比后脂肪抑制 T1 加权图像中提取了放射学数据。利用这些数据构建了人工神经网络(ANN)、支持向量机、随机森林和天真贝叶斯模型:在所有读者中,O-RADS 4 组的一致性最低(kappa:0.669(95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.634-0.733)),其次是 O-RADS 5 组(kappa:0.709(95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.678-0.754))。O-RADS 4 预测恶性肿瘤的曲线下面积(AUC)值为 74.3%(95% CI 0.701-0.782),O-RADS 5 预测恶性肿瘤的曲线下面积(AUC)值为 95.5%(95% CI 0.932-0.972):在分配 O-RADS 4-5 时,O-RADS MRI 的观察者间一致性和诊断灵敏度并不完美,这表明需要在结构上加以改进。将人工智能融入核磁共振成像方案可提高其性能:机器学习可实现对 O-RADS MRI 正确分类的高准确性。O-RADS 4 的恶性肿瘤预测率为 74%,O-RADS 5 为 95%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) MRI Scoring: Diagnostic Accuracy, Interobserver Agreement, and Applicability to Machine Learning.

Objectives: To evaluate the interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy of ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system magnetic resonance imaging (O-RADS MRI) and applicability to machine learning.

Material and methods: Dynamic contrast-enhanced pelvic MRI examinations 471 lesions were retrospectively analyzed and assessed by three radiologists according to O-RADS MRI criteria. Radiomic data were extracted from T2, and post-contrast fat-suppressed T1-weighted images. Using these data, an artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine, random forest, and naive Bayes models were constructed.

Results: Among all readers, the lowest agreement was found for the O-RADS 4 group (kappa: 0.669 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.634-0.733)), followed by the O-RADS 5 group (kappa: 0.709 (95% CI 0.678-0.754)). O-RADS 4 predicted a malignancy with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 74.3% (95% CI 0.701-0.782), and O-RADS 5 with an AUC of 95.5% (95% CI 0.932-0.972),(p < 0.001). Among the machine learning models, ANN achieved the highest success, distinguishing O-RADS groups with an AUC of 0.948, a precision of 0.861, and a recall of 0.824.

Conclusion: The interobserver agreement and diagnostic sensitivity of the O-RADS MRI in assigning O-RADS 4-5 were not perfect, indicating a need for structural improvement. Integrating artificial intelligence into MRI protocols may enhance their performance.

Advances in knowledge: Machine learning can achieve high accuracy in the correct classification of O-RADS MRI. Malignancy prediction rates were 74% for O-RADS 4 and 95% for O-RADS 5.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Radiology
British Journal of Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
330
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: BJR is the international research journal of the British Institute of Radiology and is the oldest scientific journal in the field of radiology and related sciences. Dating back to 1896, BJR’s history is radiology’s history, and the journal has featured some landmark papers such as the first description of Computed Tomography "Computerized transverse axial tomography" by Godfrey Hounsfield in 1973. A valuable historical resource, the complete BJR archive has been digitized from 1896. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor – 1.840 - Receipt to first decision – average of 6 weeks - Acceptance to online publication – average of 3 weeks - ISSN: 0007-1285 - eISSN: 1748-880X Open Access option
×
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