Eun Young Kim1, Young Jae Kim2, Won-Jun Choi3, Gi Pyo Lee2, Ye Ra Choi4,5, Kwang Nam Jin4,5, Young Jun Cho6,7. 1. Department of Radiology, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea. 3. Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea. 4. Department of Radiology, Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea. 5. Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 6. Department of Radiology, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, South Korea. 7. Konyang University School of Medicine, Daejeon, South Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the performance of a commercially available deep-learning algorithm (DLA) (Insight CXR, Lunit, Seoul, South Korea) for referable thoracic abnormalities on chest X-ray (CXR) using a consecutively collected multicenter health screening cohort. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A consecutive health screening cohort of participants who underwent both CXR and chest computed tomography (CT) within 1 month was retrospectively collected from three institutions' health care clinics (n = 5,887). Referable thoracic abnormalities were defined as any radiologic findings requiring further diagnostic evaluation or management, including DLA-target lesions of nodule/mass, consolidation, or pneumothorax. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the DLA for referable thoracic abnormalities using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using ground truth based on chest CT (CT-GT). In addition, for CT-GT-positive cases, three independent radiologist readings were performed on CXR and clear visible (when more than two radiologists called) and visible (at least one radiologist called) abnormalities were defined as CXR-GTs (clear visible CXR-GT and visible CXR-GT, respectively) to evaluate the performance of the DLA. RESULTS: Among 5,887 subjects (4,329 males; mean age 54±11 years), referable thoracic abnormalities were found in 618 (10.5%) based on CT-GT. DLA-target lesions were observed in 223 (4.0%), nodule/mass in 202 (3.4%), consolidation in 31 (0.5%), pneumothorax in one 1 (<0.1%), and DLA-non-target lesions in 409 (6.9%). For referable thoracic abnormalities based on CT-GT, the DLA showed an AUC of 0.771 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.751-0.791), a sensitivity of 69.6%, and a specificity of 74.0%. Based on CXR-GT, the prevalence of referable thoracic abnormalities decreased, with visible and clear visible abnormalities found in 405 (6.9%) and 227 (3.9%) cases, respectively. The performance of the DLA increased significantly when using CXR-GTs, with an AUC of 0.839 (95% CI, 0.829-0.848), a sensitivity of 82.7%, and s specificity of 73.2% based on visible CXR-GT and an AUC of 0.872 (95% CI, 0.863-0.880, P <0.001 for the AUC comparison of GT-CT vs. clear visible CXR-GT), a sensitivity of 83.3%, and a specificity of 78.8% based on clear visible CXR-GT. CONCLUSION: The DLA provided fair-to-good stand-alone performance for the detection of referable thoracic abnormalities in a multicenter consecutive health screening cohort. The DLA showed varied performance according to the different methods of ground truth.
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the performance of a commercially available deep-learning algorithm (DLA) (Insight CXR, Lunit, Seoul, South Korea) for referable thoracic abnormalities on chest X-ray (CXR) using a consecutively collected multicenter health screening cohort. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A consecutive health screening cohort of participants who underwent both CXR and chest computed tomography (CT) within 1 month was retrospectively collected from three institutions' health care clinics (n = 5,887). Referable thoracic abnormalities were defined as any radiologic findings requiring further diagnostic evaluation or management, including DLA-target lesions of nodule/mass, consolidation, or pneumothorax. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the DLA for referable thoracic abnormalities using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using ground truth based on chest CT (CT-GT). In addition, for CT-GT-positive cases, three independent radiologist readings were performed on CXR and clear visible (when more than two radiologists called) and visible (at least one radiologist called) abnormalities were defined as CXR-GTs (clear visible CXR-GT and visible CXR-GT, respectively) to evaluate the performance of the DLA. RESULTS: Among 5,887 subjects (4,329 males; mean age 54±11 years), referable thoracic abnormalities were found in 618 (10.5%) based on CT-GT. DLA-target lesions were observed in 223 (4.0%), nodule/mass in 202 (3.4%), consolidation in 31 (0.5%), pneumothorax in one 1 (<0.1%), and DLA-non-target lesions in 409 (6.9%). For referable thoracic abnormalities based on CT-GT, the DLA showed an AUC of 0.771 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.751-0.791), a sensitivity of 69.6%, and a specificity of 74.0%. Based on CXR-GT, the prevalence of referable thoracic abnormalities decreased, with visible and clear visible abnormalities found in 405 (6.9%) and 227 (3.9%) cases, respectively. The performance of the DLA increased significantly when using CXR-GTs, with an AUC of 0.839 (95% CI, 0.829-0.848), a sensitivity of 82.7%, and s specificity of 73.2% based on visible CXR-GT and an AUC of 0.872 (95% CI, 0.863-0.880, P <0.001 for the AUC comparison of GT-CT vs. clear visible CXR-GT), a sensitivity of 83.3%, and a specificity of 78.8% based on clear visible CXR-GT. CONCLUSION: The DLA provided fair-to-good stand-alone performance for the detection of referable thoracic abnormalities in a multicenter consecutive health screening cohort. The DLA showed varied performance according to the different methods of ground truth.
Authors: Leandro Luís Galdino Oliveira; Simonne Almeida E Silva; Luiza Helena Vilela Ribeiro; Renato Maurício de Oliveira; Clarimar José Coelho; Ana Lúcia S S Andrade Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2008-02-20 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: David M Hansell; Alexander A Bankier; Heber MacMahon; Theresa C McLoud; Nestor L Müller; Jacques Remy Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-01-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ju Gang Nam; Sunggyun Park; Eui Jin Hwang; Jong Hyuk Lee; Kwang-Nam Jin; Kun Young Lim; Thienkai Huy Vu; Jae Ho Sohn; Sangheum Hwang; Jin Mo Goo; Chang Min Park Journal: Radiology Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Eui Jin Hwang; Sunggyun Park; Kwang-Nam Jin; Jung Im Kim; So Young Choi; Jong Hyuk Lee; Jin Mo Goo; Jaehong Aum; Jae-Joon Yim; Julien G Cohen; Gilbert R Ferretti; Chang Min Park Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-03-01
Authors: Pranav Rajpurkar; Jeremy Irvin; Robyn L Ball; Kaylie Zhu; Brandon Yang; Hershel Mehta; Tony Duan; Daisy Ding; Aarti Bagul; Curtis P Langlotz; Bhavik N Patel; Kristen W Yeom; Katie Shpanskaya; Francis G Blankenberg; Jayne Seekins; Timothy J Amrhein; David A Mong; Safwan S Halabi; Evan J Zucker; Andrew Y Ng; Matthew P Lungren Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Eun Young Kim; Young Jae Kim; Won-Jun Choi; Gi Pyo Lee; Ye Ra Choi; Kwang Nam Jin; Young Jun Cho Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jeong Hoon Lee; Jong Seok Ahn; Myung Jin Chung; Yeon Joo Jeong; Jin Hwan Kim; Jae Kwang Lim; Jin Young Kim; Young Jae Kim; Jong Eun Lee; Eun Young Kim Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2022-07-02 Impact factor: 3.847
Authors: Eun Young Kim; Young Jae Kim; Won-Jun Choi; Ji Soo Jeon; Moon Young Kim; Dong Hyun Oh; Kwang Nam Jin; Young Jun Cho Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-02-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hyunsuk Yoo; Eun Young Kim; Hyungjin Kim; Ye Ra Choi; Moon Young Kim; Sung Ho Hwang; Young Joong Kim; Young Jun Cho; Kwang Nam Jin Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2022-10 Impact factor: 7.109