Assessing diagnostic complexity: An image feature-based strategy to reduce annotation costs.

Computer-aided diagnosis systems can play an important role in lowering the workload of clinical radiologists and reducing costs by automatically analyzing vast amounts of image data and providing meaningful and timely insights during the decision making process. In this paper, we present strategies on how to better manage the limited time of clinical radiologists in conjunction with predictive model diagnosis. We first introduce a metric for discriminating between the different categories of diagnostic complexity (such as easy versus hard) encountered when interpreting CT scans. Second, we propose to learn the diagnostic complexity using a classification approach based on low-level image features automatically extracted from pixel data. We then show how this classification can be used to decide how to best allocate additional radiologists to interpret a case based on its diagnosis category. Using a lung nodule image dataset, we determined that, by a simple division of cases into hard and easy to diagnose, the number of interpretations can be distributed to significantly lower the cost with limited loss in prediction accuracy. Furthermore, we show that with just a few low-level image features (18% of the original set) we are able to determine the easy from hard cases for a significant subset (66%) of the lung nodule image data.

Mapping LIDC, RadLex™, and lung nodule image features.

Ideally, an image should be reported and interpreted in the same way (e.g., the same perceived likelihood of malignancy) or similarly by any two radiologists; however, as much research has demonstrated, this is not often the case. Various efforts have made an attempt at tackling the problem of reducing the variability in radiologists' interpretations of images. The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) has provided a database of lung nodule images and associated radiologist ratings in an effort to provide images to aid in the analysis of computer-aided tools. Likewise, the Radiological Society of North America has developed a radiological lexicon called RadLex. As such, the goal of this paper is to investigate the feasibility of associating LIDC characteristics and terminology with RadLex terminology. If matches between LIDC characteristics and RadLex terms are found, probabilistic models based on image features may be used as decision-based rules to predict if an image or lung nodule could be characterized or classified as an associated RadLex term. The results of this study were matches for 25 (74%) out of 34 LIDC terms in RadLex. This suggests that LIDC characteristics and associated rating terminology may be better conceptualized or reduced to produce even more matches with RadLex. Ultimately, the goal is to identify and establish a more standardized rating system and terminology to reduce the subjective variability between radiologist annotations. A standardized rating system can then be utilized by future researchers to develop automatic annotation models and tools for computer-aided decision systems.

Comparison and evaluation of methods for liver segmentation from CT datasets.

This paper presents a comparison study between 10 automatic and six interactive methods for liver segmentation from contrast-enhanced CT images. It is based on results from the "MICCAI 2007 Grand Challenge" workshop, where 16 teams evaluated their algorithms on a common database. A collection of 20 clinical images with reference segmentations was provided to train and tune algorithms in advance. Participants were also allowed to use additional proprietary training data for that purpose. All teams then had to apply their methods to 10 test datasets and submit the obtained results. Employed algorithms include statistical shape models, atlas registration, level-sets, graph-cuts and rule-based systems. All results were compared to reference segmentations five error measures that highlight different aspects of segmentation accuracy. All measures were combined according to a specific scoring system relating the obtained values to human expert variability. In general, interactive methods reached higher average scores than automatic approaches and featured a better consistency of segmentation quality. However, the best automatic methods (mainly based on statistical shape models with some additional free deformation) could compete well on the majority of test images. The study provides an insight in performance of different segmentation approaches under real-world conditions and highlights achievements and limitations of current image analysis techniques.

Single organ segmentation filters for multiple organ segmentation.

In this paper, we propose an approach for automatic organ segmentation in computed tomography (CT) data. The approach consists of applying multiple single organ segmentation filters and resolving conflicts among the single organ segmentations to generate a multiple organ segmentation. Each of the single organ segmentations consists of three stages: first, a probability image of the organ of interest is obtained by applying a binary classification model obtained using pixel-based texture features; second, an adaptive split-and-merge segmentation algorithm is applied on the organ probability image to remove the noise introduced by the misclassified pixels; and third, the segmented organ's boundaries from the previous stage are iteratively refined using a region growing algorithm. The conflict resolution among the single organ segmentations involves comparing region sizes and average probabilities over contested pixels.