应用人工智能对腋窝淋巴结转移的超声评估。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 ACOUSTICS Ultrasonic Imaging Pub Date : 2021-11-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-20 DOI:10.1177/01617346211035315
Aylin Tahmasebi, Enze Qu, Alexander Sevrukov, Ji-Bin Liu, Shuo Wang, Andrej Lyshchik, Joshua Yu, John R Eisenbrey
{"title":"应用人工智能对腋窝淋巴结转移的超声评估。","authors":"Aylin Tahmasebi,&nbsp;Enze Qu,&nbsp;Alexander Sevrukov,&nbsp;Ji-Bin Liu,&nbsp;Shuo Wang,&nbsp;Andrej Lyshchik,&nbsp;Joshua Yu,&nbsp;John R Eisenbrey","doi":"10.1177/01617346211035315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI) system for the classification of axillary lymph nodes on ultrasound compared to radiologists. Ultrasound images of 317 axillary lymph nodes from patients referred for ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration or core needle biopsy and corresponding pathology findings were collected. Lymph nodes were classified into benign and malignant groups with histopathological result serving as the reference. Google Cloud AutoML Vision (Mountain View, CA) was used for AI image classification. Three experienced radiologists also classified the images and gave a level of suspicion score (1-5). To test the accuracy of AI, an external testing dataset of 64 images from 64 independent patients was evaluated by three AI models and the three readers. The diagnostic performance of AI and the humans were then quantified using receiver operating characteristics curves. In the complete set of 317 images, AutoML achieved a sensitivity of 77.1%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 77.1%, and an area under the precision recall curve of 0.78, while the three radiologists showed a sensitivity of 87.8% ± 8.5%, specificity of 50.3% ± 16.4%, PPV of 61.1% ± 5.4%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 84.1% ± 6.6%, and accuracy of 67.7% ± 5.7%. In the three external independent test sets, AI and human readers achieved sensitivity of 74.0% ± 0.14% versus 89.9% ± 0.06% (<i>p</i> = .25), specificity of 64.4% ± 0.11% versus 50.1 ± 0.20% (<i>p</i> = .22), PPV of 68.3% ± 0.04% versus 65.4 ± 0.07% (<i>p</i> = .50), NPV of 72.6% ± 0.11% versus 82.1% ± 0.08% (<i>p</i> = .33), and accuracy of 69.5% ± 0.06% versus 70.1% ± 0.07% (<i>p</i> = .90), respectively. These preliminary results indicate AI has comparable performance to trained radiologists and could be used to predict the presence of metastasis in ultrasound images of axillary lymph nodes.</p>","PeriodicalId":49401,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasonic Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Axillary Lymph Nodes for Metastasis on Ultrasound Using Artificial Intelligence.\",\"authors\":\"Aylin Tahmasebi,&nbsp;Enze Qu,&nbsp;Alexander Sevrukov,&nbsp;Ji-Bin Liu,&nbsp;Shuo Wang,&nbsp;Andrej Lyshchik,&nbsp;Joshua Yu,&nbsp;John R Eisenbrey\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01617346211035315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI) system for the classification of axillary lymph nodes on ultrasound compared to radiologists. Ultrasound images of 317 axillary lymph nodes from patients referred for ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration or core needle biopsy and corresponding pathology findings were collected. Lymph nodes were classified into benign and malignant groups with histopathological result serving as the reference. Google Cloud AutoML Vision (Mountain View, CA) was used for AI image classification. Three experienced radiologists also classified the images and gave a level of suspicion score (1-5). To test the accuracy of AI, an external testing dataset of 64 images from 64 independent patients was evaluated by three AI models and the three readers. The diagnostic performance of AI and the humans were then quantified using receiver operating characteristics curves. In the complete set of 317 images, AutoML achieved a sensitivity of 77.1%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 77.1%, and an area under the precision recall curve of 0.78, while the three radiologists showed a sensitivity of 87.8% ± 8.5%, specificity of 50.3% ± 16.4%, PPV of 61.1% ± 5.4%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 84.1% ± 6.6%, and accuracy of 67.7% ± 5.7%. In the three external independent test sets, AI and human readers achieved sensitivity of 74.0% ± 0.14% versus 89.9% ± 0.06% (<i>p</i> = .25), specificity of 64.4% ± 0.11% versus 50.1 ± 0.20% (<i>p</i> = .22), PPV of 68.3% ± 0.04% versus 65.4 ± 0.07% (<i>p</i> = .50), NPV of 72.6% ± 0.11% versus 82.1% ± 0.08% (<i>p</i> = .33), and accuracy of 69.5% ± 0.06% versus 70.1% ± 0.07% (<i>p</i> = .90), respectively. These preliminary results indicate AI has comparable performance to trained radiologists and could be used to predict the presence of metastasis in ultrasound images of axillary lymph nodes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49401,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ultrasonic Imaging\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ultrasonic Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01617346211035315\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/8/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ACOUSTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasonic Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01617346211035315","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

本研究的目的是评估人工智能(AI)系统对超声腋窝淋巴结的分类,并与放射科医生进行比较。收集317例行超声引导下细针穿刺或芯针活检患者腋窝淋巴结的超声图像及相应病理表现。以组织病理学结果为参照,将淋巴结分为良、恶性两组。使用Google Cloud AutoML Vision (Mountain View, CA)进行AI图像分类。三位经验丰富的放射科医生也对图像进行了分类,并给出了怀疑程度评分(1-5)。为了测试人工智能的准确性,来自64名独立患者的64张图像的外部测试数据集由三个人工智能模型和三个阅读器进行评估。然后使用接受者工作特征曲线对人工智能和人类的诊断性能进行量化。在完整的317张图像中,AutoML的灵敏度为77.1%,阳性预测值(PPV)为77.1%,精确召回曲线下面积为0.78,而三位放射科医生的灵敏度为87.8%±8.5%,特异性为50.3%±16.4%,PPV为61.1%±5.4%,阴性预测值(NPV)为84.1%±6.6%,准确率为67.7%±5.7%。在三个外部独立测试集中,人工智能和人类阅读器的灵敏度分别为74.0%±0.14%对89.9%±0.06% (p = 0.25),特异性分别为64.4%±0.11%对50.1±0.20% (p = 0.22), PPV分别为68.3%±0.04%对65.4±0.07% (p = 0.50), NPV分别为72.6%±0.11%对82.1%±0.08% (p = 0.33),准确率分别为69.5%±0.06%对70.1%±0.07% (p = 0.90)。这些初步结果表明,人工智能具有与训练有素的放射科医生相当的性能,可用于预测腋窝淋巴结超声图像中是否存在转移。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of Axillary Lymph Nodes for Metastasis on Ultrasound Using Artificial Intelligence.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI) system for the classification of axillary lymph nodes on ultrasound compared to radiologists. Ultrasound images of 317 axillary lymph nodes from patients referred for ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration or core needle biopsy and corresponding pathology findings were collected. Lymph nodes were classified into benign and malignant groups with histopathological result serving as the reference. Google Cloud AutoML Vision (Mountain View, CA) was used for AI image classification. Three experienced radiologists also classified the images and gave a level of suspicion score (1-5). To test the accuracy of AI, an external testing dataset of 64 images from 64 independent patients was evaluated by three AI models and the three readers. The diagnostic performance of AI and the humans were then quantified using receiver operating characteristics curves. In the complete set of 317 images, AutoML achieved a sensitivity of 77.1%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 77.1%, and an area under the precision recall curve of 0.78, while the three radiologists showed a sensitivity of 87.8% ± 8.5%, specificity of 50.3% ± 16.4%, PPV of 61.1% ± 5.4%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 84.1% ± 6.6%, and accuracy of 67.7% ± 5.7%. In the three external independent test sets, AI and human readers achieved sensitivity of 74.0% ± 0.14% versus 89.9% ± 0.06% (p = .25), specificity of 64.4% ± 0.11% versus 50.1 ± 0.20% (p = .22), PPV of 68.3% ± 0.04% versus 65.4 ± 0.07% (p = .50), NPV of 72.6% ± 0.11% versus 82.1% ± 0.08% (p = .33), and accuracy of 69.5% ± 0.06% versus 70.1% ± 0.07% (p = .90), respectively. These preliminary results indicate AI has comparable performance to trained radiologists and could be used to predict the presence of metastasis in ultrasound images of axillary lymph nodes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasonic Imaging
Ultrasonic Imaging 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
15
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ultrasonic Imaging provides rapid publication for original and exceptional papers concerned with the development and application of ultrasonic-imaging technology. Ultrasonic Imaging publishes articles in the following areas: theoretical and experimental aspects of advanced methods and instrumentation for imaging
期刊最新文献
Image Features and Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: Preliminary Findings. Ultrasonic Imaging of Deeper Bone Defect Using Virtual Source Synthetic Aperture with Phased Shift Migration: A Phantom Study. Predictive Value of the Nomogram Model Based on Multimodal Ultrasound Features for Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules of C-TIRADS Category 4. High Frequency Ultrasound Transducer Based on Sm-Doped Pb(Mg1/3Nb2/3)O3-0.28PbTiO3 Ceramic for Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging. Development and Assessment of a Predictive Model for Ki-67 Expression Using Ultrasound Indicators and Non-Morphological Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters Before Breast Cancer Therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1