Cited by 32Lung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentAI in cancer detectionRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Prior CT Improves Deep Learning for Malignancy Risk Estimation of Screening-detected Pulmonary Nodules

Open access
Vaidhya Venkadesh, Kiran, Aleef, Tajwar Abrar, Scholten, Ernst T., Saghir, Zaigham, Silva, Mario, Sverzellati, Nicola, Pastorino, Ugo, van Ginneken, Bram +2 more·2023·Radiology

Abstract

Background Prior chest CT provides valuable temporal information (eg, changes in nodule size or appearance) to accurately estimate malignancy risk. Purpose To develop a deep learning (DL) algorithm that uses a current and prior low-dose CT examination to estimate 3-year malignancy risk of pulmonary nodules. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, the algorithm was trained using National Lung Screening Trial data (collected from 2002 to 2004), wherein patients were imaged at most 2 years apart, and evaluated with two external test sets from the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST) and the Multicentric Italian Lung Detection Trial (MILD), collected in 2004–2010 and 2005–2014, respectively. Performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on cancer-enriched subsets with size-matched benign nodules imaged 1 and 2 years apart from DLCST and MILD, respectively. The algorithm was compared with a validated DL algorithm that only processed a single CT examination and the Pan-Canadian Early Lung Cancer Detection Study (PanCan) model. Results The training set included 10 508 nodules (422 malignant) in 4902 trial participants (mean age, 64 years ± 5 [SD]; 2778 men). The size-matched external test sets included 129 nodules (43 malignant) and 126 nodules (42 malignant). The algorithm achieved AUCs of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.97) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.98). It significantly outperformed the DL algorithm that only processed a single CT examination (AUC, 0.85 [95% CI: 0.78, 0.92; P = .002]; and AUC, 0.89 [95% CI: 0.84, 0.95; P = .01]) and the PanCan model (AUC, 0.64 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.74; P < .001]; and AUC, 0.63 [95% CI: 0.52, 0.74; P < .001]). Conclusion A DL algorithm using current and prior low-dose CT examinations was more effective at estimating 3-year malignancy risk of pulmonary nodules than established models that only use a single CT examination. Clinical trial registration nos. NCT00047385, NCT00496977, NCT02837809 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Horst and Nishino in this issue.

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 · 10.1148/radiol.223308

Cites

35 of 35 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?

  • In oncology, longitudinal information is important to assess slowly progressive forms of cancer or cancers with unclear dignity, as well as in evaluation of treatment response.

    “For example, in oncology, longitudinal information is important to assess slowly progressive forms of cancer or cancers with yet unclear dignity18 (benign vs. malignant), as well as in the evaluation of treatment response.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Tammemägi MC. Lung Cancer Screening with CT: A Few Steps on a Long Journey. Radiology 2021;300(2):448-449.
  2. He K, Zhang X, Ren S, Sun J. Deep Residual Learning for Image Rec- ognition. 2016 IEEE Conf Comput Vis Pattern Recognit CVPR. IEEE, 2016; 770-778.
  3. Platt J. Probabilistic outputs for support vector machines and comparisons to regularized likelihood methods. Adv Large Margin Classif 1999;10(3):61-74. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user= rtWKzFwAAAAJ&citation_for_view=rtWKzFwAAAAJ:u-x6o8ySG0sC.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vaidhya Venkadesh, K., Aleef, T. A., Scholten, E. T., Saghir, Z., Silva, M., Sverzellati, N., Pastorino, U., van Ginneken, B., Prokop, M., & Jacobs, C.
Affiliations
University of Copenhagen (DK)
Venue
Radiology
Published
2023-08-01
Volume
308
Issue
2
Pages
e223308-e223308
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W4385441689
Cited by
32
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
pulmonary nodules, low-dose CT, lung cancer screening, deep learning, nodule growth, National Lung Screening Trial, nodule characterization, benign versus malignant nodules, external validation, model comparison
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Canada, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Early Detection of Cancer, Multiple Pulmonary Nodules

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