Deep learning for semi-automated unidirectional measurement of lung tumor size in CT.

BACKGROUND: Performing Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECISTS) measurement is a non-trivial task requiring much expertise and time. A deep learning-based algorithm has the potential to assist with rapid and consistent lesion measurement. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate deep learning (DL) algorithm for semi-automated unidirectional CT measurement of lung lesions. METHODS: This retrospective study included 1617 lung CT images from 8 publicly open datasets. A convolutional neural network was trained using 1373 training and validation images annotated by two radiologists. Performance of the DL algorithm was evaluated 244 test images annotated by one radiologist. DL algorithm's measurement consistency with human radiologist was evaluated using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plotting. Bonferroni's method was used to analyze difference in their diagnostic behavior, attributed by tumor characteristics. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The DL algorithm yielded ICC score of 0.959 with human radiologist. Bland-Altman plotting suggested 240 (98.4 %) measurements realized within the upper and lower limits of agreement (LOA). Some measurements outside the LOA revealed difference in clinical reasoning between DL algorithm and human radiologist. Overall, the algorithm marginally overestimated the size of lesion by 2.97 % compared to human radiologists. Further investigation indicated tumor characteristics may be associated with the DL algorithm's diagnostic behavior of over or underestimating the lesion size compared to human radiologist. CONCLUSIONS: The DL algorithm for unidirectional measurement of lung tumor size demonstrated excellent agreement with human radiologist.

Intervention to Reduce Interobserver Variability in Computed Tomographic Measurement of Cancer Lesions Among Experienced Radiologists.

While a growing number of research studies have reported the inter-observer variability in computed tomographic (CT) measurements, there are very few interventional studies performed. We aimed to assess whether a peer benchmarking intervention tool may have an influence on reducing interobserver variability in CT measurements and identify possible barriers to the intervention. In this retrospective study, 13 board-certified radiologists repeatedly reviewed 10 CT image sets of lung lesions and hepatic metastases during 3 noncontiguous time periods (T1, T2, T3). Each preselected case contained normal anatomy cephalad and caudal to the lesion of interest. Lesion size measurement under RECISTS 1.1 guidelines, choice of CT slice, and time spent on measurement were captured. Prior to their final measurements, the participants were exposed to the intervention designed to reduce the number of measurements deviating from the median. Chi-square test was performed to identify radiologist-dependent factors associated with the variability. The percent of deviating measurements during T1 and T2 were 20.0% and 23.1%, respectively. There was no statistically significant change in the number of deviating measurements upon the presentation of the intervention despite the decrease in percent from 23.1% to 17.7%. The identified barriers to the intervention include clinical disagreements among radiologists. Specifically, the inter-observer variability was associated with the controversy over the choice of CT image slice (P = 0.045) and selection of start-point, axis, and end-point (P = 0.011). Clinical disagreements rather than random errors were barriers to reducing interobserver variability in CT measurement among experienced radiologists. Future interventions could aim to resolve the disagreement in an interactive approach.

Retrospective comparison of approaches to evaluating inter-observer variability in CT tumour measurements in an academic health centre.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of research studies have reported inter-observer variability in sizes of tumours measured from CT scans. It remains unclear whether the conventional statistical measures correctly evaluate the CT measurement consistency for optimal treatment management and decision-making. We compared and evaluated the existing measures for evaluating inter-observer variability in CT measurement of cancer lesions. METHODS: 13 board-certified radiologists repeatedly reviewed 10 CT image sets of lung lesions and hepatic metastases selected through a randomisation process. A total of 130 measurements under RECIST 1.1 (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) guidelines were collected for the demonstration. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plotting and outlier counting methods were selected for the comparison. The each selected measure was used to evaluate three cases with observed, increased and decreased inter-observer variability. RESULTS: The ICC score yielded a weak detection when evaluating different levels of the inter-observer variability among radiologists (increased: 0.912; observed: 0.962; decreased: 0.990). The outlier counting method using Bland-Altman plotting with 2SD yielded no detection at all with its number of outliers unchanging regardless of level of inter-observer variability. Outlier counting based on domain knowledge was more sensitised to different levels of the inter-observer variability compared with the conventional measures (increased: 0.756; observed: 0.923; improved: 1.000). Visualisation of pairwise Bland-Altman bias was also sensitised to the inter-observer variability with its pattern rapidly changing in response to different levels of the inter-observer variability. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional measures may yield weak or no detection when evaluating different levels of the inter-observer variability among radiologists. We observed that the outlier counting based on domain knowledge was sensitised to the inter-observer variability in CT measurement of cancer lesions. Our study demonstrated that, under certain circumstances, the use of standard statistical correlation coefficients may be misleading and result in a sense of false security related to the consistency of measurement for optimal treatment management and decision-making.

Effect of clinical decision rules, patient cost and malpractice information on clinician brain CT image ordering: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of head computed tomography (CT) imaging for mild head trauma patients has raised safety and cost concerns. Validated clinical decision rules exist in the published literature and on-line sources to guide medical image ordering but are often not used by emergency department (ED) clinicians. Using simulation, we explored whether the presentation of a clinical decision rule (i.e. Canadian CT Head Rule - CCHR), findings from malpractice cases related to clinicians not ordering CT imaging in mild head trauma cases, and estimated patient out-of-pocket cost might influence clinician brain CT ordering. Understanding what type and how information may influence clinical decision making in the ordering advanced medical imaging is important in shaping the optimal design and implementation of related clinical decision support systems. METHODS: Multi-center, double-blinded simulation-based randomized controlled trial. Following standardized clinical vignette presentation, clinicians made an initial imaging decision for the patient. This was followed by additional information on decision support rules, malpractice outcome review, and patient cost; each with opportunity to modify their initial order. The malpractice and cost information differed by assigned group to test the any temporal relationship. The simulation closed with a second vignette and an imaging decision. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen of the 167 participants (66.9%) initially ordered a brain CT scan. After CCHR presentation, the number of clinicians ordering a CT dropped to 76 (45.8%), representing a 21.1% reduction in CT ordering (P = 0.002). This reduction in CT ordering was maintained, in comparison to initial imaging orders, when presented with malpractice review information (p = 0.002) and patient cost information (p = 0.002). About 57% of clinicians changed their order during study, while 43% never modified their imaging order. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that ED clinician brain CT imaging decisions may be influenced by clinical decision support rules, patient out-of-pocket cost information and findings from malpractice case review. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03449862 , February 27, 2018, Retrospectively registered.

Evidence for the extrapulmonary localization of inhaled nitric oxide.

Inhaled nitric oxide (NO) has emerged as a promising pulmonary vasodilator to treat pulmonary hypertension associated with heart disease and ventilation/perfusion mismatching. However, the pharmacokinetics of inhaled NO still remains obscure and its cardiopulmonary selectivity appears to be increasingly under debate. In the present study measured NO content and levels of cyclic guanosine 3',5'monophosphate (cGMP), a mediator of NO-induced vasodilation, in a variety of organs from rats subjected to NO inhalation. Electron spin resonance spectroscopy associated to a spin trapping technique using N-methyl D-glucamine dithiocarbamate (FeMGD) was used to directly quantify NO levels in the lung, kidney, liver, aorta, and heart from anesthetized Wistar rats subjected to various doses (0, 20, 50, 100, or 200 ppm) and various times (0, 30, 45, or 75 minutes) of inhaled NO. Inhaled NO at a dose of 100 and 200 ppm significantly increased the NO-FeMGD complex in all organs studied. An increase of cGMP was detected in the lung and the aorta after inhaled NO for 45 minutes at the dose of 50 ppm. No changes in NO levels and its metabolites were shown between 30 and 75 minutes of inhaled NO. The results show that inhaled NO at a dose of 100 ppm or more increases NO levels in other organs beside the lung, strongly suggesting that inhaled NO would be more than a pulmonary vasodilator and its selectivity remains to be reconsidered when used for therapeutic purposes.