CT colonography: Preliminary assessment of a double-read paradigm that uses computer-aided detection as the first reader

Purpose: To compare diagnostic performance and time efficiency of double-reading first-reader computer-aided detection (CAD) (DR FR CAD) followed by radiologist interpretation with that of an unassisted read using segmentally un-blinded colonoscopy as reference standard. Materials and Methods: The local ethical committee approved this study. Written consent to use examinations was obtained from patients. Three experienced radiologists searched for polyps 6 mm or larger in 155 computed tomographic (CT) colonographic studies (57 containing 10 masses and 79 polyps >= 6 mm). Reading was randomized to either unassisted read or DR FR CAD. Data sets were reread 6 weeks later by using the opposite paradigm. DR FR CAD consists of evaluation of CAD prompts, followed by fast two-dimensional review for mass detection. CAD sensitivity was calculated. Readers' diagnoses and reviewing times with and without CAD were compared by using McNemar and Student t tests, respectively. Association between missed polyps and lesion characteristics was explored with multiple regression analysis. Results: With mean rate of 19 (standard deviation, 14; median, 15; range, 4-127) false-positive results per patient, CAD sensitivity was 90% for lesions 6 mm or larger. Readers' sensitivity and specificity for lesions 6 mm or larger were 74% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 65%, 84%) and 93% (95% CI: 89%, 97%), respectively, for the unassisted read and 77% (95% CI: 67%, 85%) and 90% (95% CI: 85%, 95%), respectively, for DR FR CAD (P = .343 and P = .189, respectively). Overall unassisted and DR FR CAD reviewing times were similar (243 vs 239 seconds; P = .623); DR FR CAD was faster when the number of CAD marks per patient was 20 or fewer (187 vs 220 seconds, P < .01). Odds ratio of missing a polyp with CAD decreased as polyp size increased (0.6) and for polyps visible on both prone and supine scans (0.12); it increased for flat lesions (9.1). Conclusion: DR FR CAD paradigm had similar performance compared with unassisted interpretation but better time efficiency when 20 or fewer CAD prompts per patient were generated. (C) RSNA, 201

Facilitating Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis with Computed Tomographic Colonography

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a diagnostic technique involving helical volume acquisition of the cleansed, distended colorectum to detect colorectal cancer or potentially premalignant polyps. This Thesis summarises the evidence base, identifies areas in need of further research, quantifies sources of bias and presents novel techniques to facilitate colorectal cancer diagnosis using CTC. CTC literature is reviewed to justify the rationale for current implementation and to identify fruitful areas for research. This confirms excellent diagnostic performance can be attained providing CTC is interpreted by trained, experienced observers employing state-of-the-art implementation. The technique is superior to barium enema and consequently, it has been embraced by radiologists, clinicians and health policy-makers. Factors influencing generalisability of CTC research are investigated, firstly with a survey of European educational workshop participants which revealed limited CTC experience and training, followed by a systematic review exploring bias in research studies of diagnostic test accuracy which established that studies focussing on these aspects were lacking. Experiments to address these sources of bias are presented, using novel methodology: Conjoint analysis is used to ascertain patients‘ and clinicians’ attitudes to false-positive screening diagnoses, showing that both groups overwhelmingly value sensitivity over specificity. The results inform a weighted statistical analysis for CAD which is applied to the results of two previous studies showing the incremental benefit is significantly higher for novices than experienced readers. We have employed eye-tracking technology to establish the visual search patterns of observers reading CTC, demonstrated feasibility and developed metrics for analysis. We also describe development and validation of computer software to register prone and supine endoluminal surface locations demonstrating accurate matching of corresponding points when applied to a phantom and a generalisable, publically available, CTC database. Finally, areas in need of future development are suggested

Using CT colonography as a triage technique after a positive faecal occult blood test in colorectal cancer screening

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of CT colonography (CTC) as a triage technique in faecal occult blood test (FOBT)-positive screening participants. METHODS: Consecutive guaiac (G-FOBT) and immunochemical (I-FOBT) FOBT-positive patients scheduled for colonoscopy underwent CTC with iodine tagging bowel preparation. Each CTC was read independently by two experienced observers. Per patient sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated based on double reading with different CTC cut-off lesion sizes using segmental unblinded colonoscopy as the reference standard. The acceptability of the technique to patients was evaluated with questionnaires. RESULTS: 302 FOBT-positive patients were included (54 G-FOBT and 248 I-FOBT). 22 FOBT-positive patients (7%) had a colorectal carcinoma and 211 (70%) had a lesion >or=6 mm. Participants considered colonoscopy more burdensome than CTC (por=6 mm. The PPV of CTC was 87% (95% CI 80% to 93%) and NPV 77% (95% CI 69% to 85%). Using CTC as a triage technique in 100 FOBT-positive patients would mean that colonoscopy could be prevented in 28 patients while missing >or=10 mm lesions in 2 patients. CONCLUSION: CTC with limited bowel preparation has reasonable predictive values in an FOBT-positive population and a higher acceptability to patients than colonoscopy. However, due to the high prevalence of clinically relevant lesions in FOBT-positive patients, CTC is unlikely to be an efficient triage technique in a first round FOBT population screening programme

CT colonography: external clinical validation of an algorithm for computer-assisted prone and supine registration

Purpose To perform external validation of a computer-assisted registration algorithm for prone and supine computed tomographic (CT) colonography and to compare the results with those of an existing centerline method. Materials and Methods All contributing centers had institutional review board approval; participants provided informed consent. A validation sample of CT colonographic examinations of 51 patients with 68 polyps (6–55 mm) was selected from a publicly available, HIPAA compliant, anonymized archive. No patients were excluded because of poor preparation or inadequate distension. Corresponding prone and supine polyp coordinates were recorded, and endoluminal surfaces were registered automatically by using a computer algorithm. Two observers independently scored three-dimensional endoluminal polyp registration success. Results were compared with those obtained by using the normalized distance along the colonic centerline (NDACC) method. Pairwise Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to compare gross registration error and McNemar tests were used to compare polyp conspicuity. Results Registration was possible in all 51 patients, and 136 paired polyp coordinates were generated (68 polyps) to test the algorithm. Overall mean three-dimensional polyp registration error (mean ± standard deviation, 19.9 mm ± 20.4) was significantly less than that for the NDACC method (mean, 27.4 mm ± 15.1; P = .001). Accuracy was unaffected by colonic segment (P = .76) or luminal collapse (P = .066). During endoluminal review by two observers (272 matching tasks, 68 polyps, prone to supine and supine to prone coordinates), 223 (82%) polyp matches were visible (120° field of view) compared with just 129 (47%) when the NDACC method was used (P < .001). By using multiplanar visualization, 48 (70%) polyps were visible after scrolling ± 15 mm in any multiplanar axis compared with 16 (24%) for NDACC (P < .001). Conclusion Computer-assisted registration is more accurate than the NDACC method for mapping the endoluminal surface and matching the location of polyps in corresponding prone and supine CT colonographic acquisitions

Towards greater clarity for the analysis of imaging studies: Development & validation of an alternative to the area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve.

This thesis arose from a 2006 study performed by the author and his collaborators that attempted to gain regulatory approval for computer-assisted detection (CAD) software. The USA Food & Drug Administration (FDA) obliged us to use the change in the area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (ROC AUC) as our primary outcome. Despite its wide dissemination in radiology research, we found implementation of ROC AUC very problematic. This thesis explores the hurdles we encountered and argues for an alternative approach. Chapter 1 describes the rationale for and against ROC AUC as a measure of diagnostic performance. An alternative analysis based on net benefit is proposed on the basis that it is more transparent and simpler to interpret. Chapter 2 uses the net benefit method to analyse a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) study of CAD for CT colonography. The analysis requires an estimate of relative misclassification costs for false-negative versus false-positive diagnoses; “W”. This study used a conservative value for W, arrived at via consensus. In Chapter 3 an evidence-based value for W in the context of screening for colorectal cancer and polyps by CT colonography is arrived at via a discrete choice experiment (DCE) of patients and healthcare workers. Chapter 4 uses the value for W obtained in Chapter 3 in a net benefit analysis to compare observer performance in two MRMC studies of CAD for CT colonography. Chapter 5 obtains W by DCE for a different clinical context – detection of extracolonic pathology by CT colonography. Chapter 6 describes a systematic review that aims to determine whether reporting of MRMC ROC AUC methods in the radiological literature is comprehensive. Chapter 7 then provides guidelines for the comprehensive reporting of MRMC ROC AUC studies. The thesis finishes with a summary of the work performed and suggestions for further research