基于结构mri的阿尔茨海默病计算机辅助诊断模型:对错误分类和诊断局限性的见解。

IF 13.2 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Xiaopeng Kang, Jiaji Lin, Kun Zhao, Shaozhen Yan, Pindong Chen, Dawei Wang, Hongxiang Yao, Bo Zhou, Chunshui Yu, Pan Wang, Zhengluan Liao, Yan Chen, Xi Zhang, Ying Han, Jie Lu, Yong Liu
{"title":"基于结构mri的阿尔茨海默病计算机辅助诊断模型:对错误分类和诊断局限性的见解。","authors":"Xiaopeng Kang, Jiaji Lin, Kun Zhao, Shaozhen Yan, Pindong Chen, Dawei Wang, Hongxiang Yao, Bo Zhou, Chunshui Yu, Pan Wang, Zhengluan Liao, Yan Chen, Xi Zhang, Ying Han, Jie Lu, Yong Liu","doi":"10.1148/ryai.240508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>\"Just Accepted\" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in <i>Radiology: Artificial Intelligence</i>. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content.</i> Purpose To examine common patterns among different computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) models for Alzheimer's disease (AD) using structural MRI data and to characterize the clinical and imaging features associated with their misclassifications. Materials and Methods This retrospective study utilized 3258 baseline structural MRIs from five multisite datasets and two multidisease datasets collected between September 2005 and December 2019. The 3D Nested Hierarchical Transformer (3DNesT) model and other CAD techniques were utilized for AD classification using 10-fold cross-validation and cross-dataset validation. Subgroup analysis of CAD-misclassified individuals compared clinical/neuroimaging biomarkers using independent <i>t</i> tests with Bonferroni correction. Results This study included 1391 patients with AD (mean age, 72.1 ± 9.2 years, 757 female), 205 with other neurodegenerative diseases (mean age, 64.9 ± 9.9 years, 117 male), and 1662 healthy controls (mean age, 70.6 ± 7.6 years, 935 female). The 3DNesT model achieved 90.1 ± 2.3% crossvalidation accuracy and 82.2%, 90.1%, and 91.6% in three external datasets. Further analysis suggested that false negative (FN) subgroup (<i>n</i> = 223) exhibited minimal atrophy and better cognitive performance than true positive (TP) subgroup (MMSE, FN, 21.4 ± 4.4; TP, 19.7 ± 5.7; <i>P<sub>FWE</sub></i> < 0.001), despite displaying similar levels of amyloid beta (FN, 705.9 ± 353.9; TP, 665.7 ± 305.8; <i>P<sub>FWE</sub></i> = 0.47), Tau (FN, 352.4 ± 166.8; TP, 371.0 ± 141.8; <i>P<sub>FWE</sub></i> = 0.47) burden. Conclusion FN subgroup exhibited atypical structural MRI patterns and clinical measures, fundamentally limiting the diagnostic performance of CAD models based solely on structural MRI. ©RSNA, 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":29787,"journal":{"name":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","volume":" ","pages":"e240508"},"PeriodicalIF":13.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structural MRI-based Computer-aided Diagnosis Models for Alzheimer Disease: Insights into Misclassifications and Diagnostic Limitations.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaopeng Kang, Jiaji Lin, Kun Zhao, Shaozhen Yan, Pindong Chen, Dawei Wang, Hongxiang Yao, Bo Zhou, Chunshui Yu, Pan Wang, Zhengluan Liao, Yan Chen, Xi Zhang, Ying Han, Jie Lu, Yong Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1148/ryai.240508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>\\\"Just Accepted\\\" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in <i>Radiology: Artificial Intelligence</i>. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content.</i> Purpose To examine common patterns among different computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) models for Alzheimer's disease (AD) using structural MRI data and to characterize the clinical and imaging features associated with their misclassifications. Materials and Methods This retrospective study utilized 3258 baseline structural MRIs from five multisite datasets and two multidisease datasets collected between September 2005 and December 2019. The 3D Nested Hierarchical Transformer (3DNesT) model and other CAD techniques were utilized for AD classification using 10-fold cross-validation and cross-dataset validation. Subgroup analysis of CAD-misclassified individuals compared clinical/neuroimaging biomarkers using independent <i>t</i> tests with Bonferroni correction. Results This study included 1391 patients with AD (mean age, 72.1 ± 9.2 years, 757 female), 205 with other neurodegenerative diseases (mean age, 64.9 ± 9.9 years, 117 male), and 1662 healthy controls (mean age, 70.6 ± 7.6 years, 935 female). The 3DNesT model achieved 90.1 ± 2.3% crossvalidation accuracy and 82.2%, 90.1%, and 91.6% in three external datasets. Further analysis suggested that false negative (FN) subgroup (<i>n</i> = 223) exhibited minimal atrophy and better cognitive performance than true positive (TP) subgroup (MMSE, FN, 21.4 ± 4.4; TP, 19.7 ± 5.7; <i>P<sub>FWE</sub></i> < 0.001), despite displaying similar levels of amyloid beta (FN, 705.9 ± 353.9; TP, 665.7 ± 305.8; <i>P<sub>FWE</sub></i> = 0.47), Tau (FN, 352.4 ± 166.8; TP, 371.0 ± 141.8; <i>P<sub>FWE</sub></i> = 0.47) burden. Conclusion FN subgroup exhibited atypical structural MRI patterns and clinical measures, fundamentally limiting the diagnostic performance of CAD models based solely on structural MRI. ©RSNA, 2025.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e240508\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.240508\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.240508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“刚刚接受”的论文经过了全面的同行评审,并已被接受发表在《放射学:人工智能》杂志上。这篇文章将经过编辑,布局和校样审查,然后在其最终版本出版。请注意,在最终编辑文章的制作过程中,可能会发现可能影响内容的错误。目的利用结构MRI数据研究不同计算机辅助诊断(CAD)阿尔茨海默病(AD)模型的共同模式,并表征与其错误分类相关的临床和影像学特征。材料和方法本回顾性研究利用2005年9月至2019年12月收集的5个多地点数据集和2个多疾病数据集的3258个基线结构mri。利用3D嵌套分层变压器(3DNesT)模型和其他CAD技术进行AD分类,并进行10倍交叉验证和跨数据集验证。使用独立t检验和Bonferroni校正对cad错误分类个体的临床/神经影像学生物标志物进行亚组分析。结果本研究纳入1391例AD患者(平均年龄72.1±9.2岁,女性757例),205例其他神经退行性疾病患者(平均年龄64.9±9.9岁,男性117例),1662例健康对照(平均年龄70.6±7.6岁,女性935例)。3DNesT模型的交叉验证准确率为90.1±2.3%,在三个外部数据集上的交叉验证准确率分别为82.2%、90.1%和91.6%。进一步分析表明,假阴性(FN)亚组(n = 223)表现出最小程度的萎缩,认知能力优于真阳性(TP)亚组(MMSE, FN, 21.4±4.4;Tp, 19.7±5.7;PFWE < 0.001),尽管显示相似的β淀粉样蛋白水平(FN, 705.9±353.9;Tp, 665.7±305.8;PFWE = 0.47), Tau (FN, 352.4±166.8;Tp, 371.0±141.8;PFWE = 0.47)负担。结论FN亚组表现出不典型的MRI结构特征和临床指标,从根本上限制了单纯基于MRI结构的CAD模型的诊断能力。©RSNA, 2025年。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Structural MRI-based Computer-aided Diagnosis Models for Alzheimer Disease: Insights into Misclassifications and Diagnostic Limitations.

"Just Accepted" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content. Purpose To examine common patterns among different computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) models for Alzheimer's disease (AD) using structural MRI data and to characterize the clinical and imaging features associated with their misclassifications. Materials and Methods This retrospective study utilized 3258 baseline structural MRIs from five multisite datasets and two multidisease datasets collected between September 2005 and December 2019. The 3D Nested Hierarchical Transformer (3DNesT) model and other CAD techniques were utilized for AD classification using 10-fold cross-validation and cross-dataset validation. Subgroup analysis of CAD-misclassified individuals compared clinical/neuroimaging biomarkers using independent t tests with Bonferroni correction. Results This study included 1391 patients with AD (mean age, 72.1 ± 9.2 years, 757 female), 205 with other neurodegenerative diseases (mean age, 64.9 ± 9.9 years, 117 male), and 1662 healthy controls (mean age, 70.6 ± 7.6 years, 935 female). The 3DNesT model achieved 90.1 ± 2.3% crossvalidation accuracy and 82.2%, 90.1%, and 91.6% in three external datasets. Further analysis suggested that false negative (FN) subgroup (n = 223) exhibited minimal atrophy and better cognitive performance than true positive (TP) subgroup (MMSE, FN, 21.4 ± 4.4; TP, 19.7 ± 5.7; PFWE < 0.001), despite displaying similar levels of amyloid beta (FN, 705.9 ± 353.9; TP, 665.7 ± 305.8; PFWE = 0.47), Tau (FN, 352.4 ± 166.8; TP, 371.0 ± 141.8; PFWE = 0.47) burden. Conclusion FN subgroup exhibited atypical structural MRI patterns and clinical measures, fundamentally limiting the diagnostic performance of CAD models based solely on structural MRI. ©RSNA, 2025.

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
CiteScore
16.20
自引率
1.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Radiology: Artificial Intelligence is a bi-monthly publication that focuses on the emerging applications of machine learning and artificial intelligence in the field of imaging across various disciplines. This journal is available online and accepts multiple manuscript types, including Original Research, Technical Developments, Data Resources, Review articles, Editorials, Letters to the Editor and Replies, Special Reports, and AI in Brief.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信