Literature DB >> 34792800

Deep-learning model observer for a low-contrast hepatic metastases localization task in computed tomography.

Hao Gong1, Joel G Fletcher1, Jay P Heiken1, Michael L Wells1, Shuai Leng1, Cynthia H McCollough1, Lifeng Yu1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Conventional model observers (MO) in CT are often limited to a uniform background or varying background that is random and can be modeled in an analytical form. It is unclear if these conventional MOs can be readily generalized to predict human observer performance in clinical CT tasks that involve realistic anatomical background. Deep-learning-based model observers (DL-MO) have recently been developed, but have not been validated for challenging low contrast diagnostic tasks in abdominal CT. We consequently sought to validate a DL-MO for a low-contrast hepatic metastases localization task.
METHODS: We adapted our recently developed DL-MO framework for the liver metastases localization task. Our previously-validated projection-domain lesion-/noise-insertion techniques were used to synthesize realistic positive and low-dose abdominal CT exams, using the archived patient projection data. Ten experimental conditions were generated, which involved different lesion sizes/contrasts, radiation dose levels, and image reconstruction types. Each condition included 100 trials generated from a patient cohort of 7 cases. Each trial was presented as liver image patches (160×160×5 voxels). The DL-MO performance was calculated for each condition and was compared with human observer performance, which was obtained by three sub-specialized radiologists in an observer study. The performance of DL-MO and radiologists was gauged by the area under localization receiver-operating-characteristic curves. The generalization performance of the DL-MO was estimated with the repeated twofold cross-validation method over the same set of trials used in the human observer study. A multi-slice Channelized Hoteling Observers (CHO) was compared with the DL-MO across the same experimental conditions.
RESULTS: The performance of DL-MO was highly correlated to that of radiologists (Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.987; 95% CI: [0.942, 0.997]). The performance level of DL-MO was comparable to that of the grouped radiologists, that is, the mean performance difference was -3.3%. The CHO performance was poorer than the grouped radiologist performance, before internal noise could be added. The correlation between CHO and radiologists was weaker (Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.812, and 95% CI: [0.378, 0.955]), and the corresponding performance bias (-29.5%) was statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: The presented study demonstrated the potential of using the DL-MO for image quality assessment in patient abdominal CT tasks.
© 2021 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  X-ray CT; deep learning; hepatic metastases; model observer; task-based image quality assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34792800      PMCID: PMC8758536          DOI: 10.1002/mp.15362

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.506


  44 in total

1.  Three-dimensional volumetry in 107 normal livers reveals clinically relevant inter-segment variation in size.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Mise; Shouichi Satou; Junichi Shindoh; Claudius Conrad; Taku Aoki; Kiyoshi Hasegawa; Yasuhiko Sugawara; Norihiro Kokudo
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-08-26       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 2.  Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images.

Authors:  R G Swensson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Lung nodule detection performance in five observers on computed tomography (CT) with adaptive iterative dose reduction using three-dimensional processing (AIDR 3D) in a Japanese multicenter study: Comparison between ultra-low-dose CT and low-dose CT by receiver-operating characteristic analysis.

Authors:  Yukihiro Nagatani; Masashi Takahashi; Kiyoshi Murata; Mitsuru Ikeda; Tsuneo Yamashiro; Tetsuhiro Miyara; Hisanobu Koyama; Mitsuhiro Koyama; Yukihisa Sato; Hiroshi Moriya; Satoshi Noma; Noriyuki Tomiyama; Yoshiharu Ohno; Sadayuki Murayama
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 3.528

4.  U.S. Diagnostic Reference Levels and Achievable Doses for 10 Adult CT Examinations.

Authors:  Kalpana M Kanal; Priscilla F Butler; Debapriya Sengupta; Mythreyi Bhargavan-Chatfield; Laura P Coombs; Richard L Morin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  A deep learning- and partial least square regression-based model observer for a low-contrast lesion detection task in CT.

Authors:  Hao Gong; Lifeng Yu; Shuai Leng; Samantha K Dilger; Liqiang Ren; Wei Zhou; Joel G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Low contrast detectability performance of model observers based on CT phantom images: kVp influence.

Authors:  I Hernandez-Giron; A Calzado; J Geleijns; R M S Joemai; W J H Veldkamp
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 2.685

Review 7.  Soft-tissue masses and masslike conditions: what does CT add to diagnosis and management?

Authors:  Ty K Subhawong; Elliot K Fishman; Jennifer E Swart; John A Carrino; Samer Attar; Laura M Fayad
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Approximating the Ideal Observer and Hotelling Observer for Binary Signal Detection Tasks by Use of Supervised Learning Methods.

Authors:  Weimin Zhou; Hua Li; Mark A Anastasio
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2019-04-15       Impact factor: 10.048

9.  A virtual clinical trial using projection-based nodule insertion to determine radiologist reader performance in lung cancer screening CT.

Authors:  Lifeng Yu; Qiyuan Hu; Chi Wan Koo; Edwin A Takahashi; David L Levin; Tucker F Johnson; Megan J Hora; Shane Dirks; Baiyu Chen; Kyle McMillan; Shuai Leng; J G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2017-03-09

10.  Bias in error estimation when using cross-validation for model selection.

Authors:  Sudhir Varma; Richard Simon
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-02-23       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.