Cited by 266Inflammatory Bowel DiseaseAI in cancer detectionColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection

Development and validation of a deep neural network for accurate evaluation of endoscopic images from patients with ulcerative colitis

Open access
Takenaka, Kento, Ohtsuka, Kazuo, Fujii, Toshimitsu, Negi, Mariko, Suzuki, Kohei, Shimizu, Hiromichi, Oshima, Shiori, Akiyama, Shintaro +5 more·2020·Gastroenterology

Abstract

Background & aims There are intra- and interobserver variations in endoscopic assessment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and biopsies are often collected for histologic evaluation. We sought to develop a deep neural network system for consistent, objective, and real-time analysis of endoscopic images from patients with UC.Methods We constructed the deep neural network for evaluation of UC (DNUC) algorithm using 40,758 images of colonoscopies and 6885 biopsy results from 2012 patients with UC who underwent colonoscopy from January 2014 through March 2018 at a single center in Japan (the training set). We validated the accuracy of the DNUC algorithm in a prospective study of 875 patients with UC who underwent colonoscopy from April 2018 through April 2019, with 4187 endoscopic images and 4104 biopsy specimens. Endoscopic remission was defined as a UC endoscopic index of severity score of 0; histologic remission was defined as a Geboes score of 3 points or less.Results In the prospective study, the DNUC identified patients with endoscopic remission with 90.1% accuracy (95% confidence interval [CI] 89.2%-90.9%) and a kappa coefficient of 0.798 (95% CI 0.780-0.814), using findings reported by endoscopists as the reference standard. The intraclass correlation coefficient between the DNUC and the endoscopists for UC endoscopic index of severity scoring was 0.917 (95% CI 0.911-0.921). The DNUC identified patients in histologic remission with 92.9% accuracy (95% CI 92.1%-93.7%); the kappa coefficient between the DNUC and the biopsy result was 0.859 (95% CI 0.841-0.875).Conclusions We developed a deep neural network for evaluation of endoscopic images from patients with UC that identified those in endoscopic remission with 90.1% accuracy and histologic remission with 92.9% accuracy. The DNUC can therefore identify patients in remission without the need for mucosal biopsy collection and analysis. Trial number: UMIN000031430.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.02.012

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several AI algorithms have been developed to accurately grade disease activity across various endoscopic scoring systems in ulcerative colitis (UC), showing excellent diagnostic performance and strong concordance with experts.

    “Recently, several AI algorithms have been developed to accurately grade disease activity across various endoscopic scoring systems in ulcerative colitis (UC) to overcome these limitations, showing excellent diagnostic performance and strong concordance with experts.13-23”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Takenaka, K., Ohtsuka, K., Fujii, T., Negi, M., Suzuki, K., Shimizu, H., Oshima, S., Akiyama, S., Motobayashi, M., Nagahori, M., Saito, E., Matsuoka, K., & Watanabe, M.
Affiliations
Tokyo Medical and Dental University (JP)
Corresponding author
Watanabe, Mamoru
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
158
Issue
8
Pages
2150-2157
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3005985118
Cited by
266
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 23 · 2017: 1
FWCI
22.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Tokyo Medical and Dental University
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (18K07902)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Inflammatory Bowel Disease
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Keywords
ulcerative colitis, deep neural network, endoscopic image analysis, endoscopic remission, histological remission, Geboes score, colonoscopy, mucosal biopsy, computer-aided diagnosis, observer variability, inflammatory bowel disease, histological classification
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Biopsy, Colitis, Ulcerative, Colon, Colonoscopy, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Remission Induction, Severity of Illness Index, Wound Healing, Reproducibility of Results, Databases, Factual, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review