Do Deep Learning Algorithms Accurately Segment Intracerebral Hemorrhages on Noncontrast Computed Tomography? A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Background Stroke, a major global health issue, is broadly categorized into ischemic and hemorrhagic types. The volume of hemorrhage on noncontrast computed tomography guides the treatment options and hints at prognosis. Conventional approaches to calculate intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) volume, like the ABC/2 method, typically rely on an assumed standard shape and might be inaccurate. Advances in deep learning have significantly improved noncontrast computed tomography's capabilities in ICH volume estimation. This study conducts a comprehensive systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate the precision of deep learning algorithms in delineating ICH on noncontrast computed tomography. Methods A systematic review and meta‐analysis, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines, was conducted on literature from 2000 to October 2023. Studies were selected on the basis of strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Performance evaluation was done using the Dice Similarity Coefficient, and the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for quality assessment. Statistical analysis was carried out using Stata 17.0. Results The review included 28 studies, mainly retrospective cohorts, with a focus on convolutional neural network architectures, particularly U‐Net variants. A meta‐analysis of 14 studies revealed a combined Dice Similarity Coefficient of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.82–0.88). Performance was consistent across various methodologies but varied on the basis of ICH pathogenesis, with spontaneous ICH having higher accuracy. Conclusion Deep learning models are highly effective in segmenting ICH on noncontrast computed tomography, demonstrating potential improvements in clinical neuroimaging. Despite their efficacy, challenges in segmenting smaller hemorrhages remain. The findings suggest that deep learning could reduce health care professional workloads and enhance patient care, although further research is needed to address limitations and extend clinical utility

Chest CT Scan Features to Predict COVID-19 Patients’ Outcome and Survival

Background. Providing efficient care for infectious coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients requires an accurate and accessible tool to medically optimize medical resource allocation to high-risk patients. Purpose. To assess the predictive value of on-admission chest CT characteristics to estimate COVID-19 patients’ outcome and survival time. Materials and Methods. Using a case-control design, we included all laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients who were deceased, from June to September 2020, in a tertiary-referral-collegiate hospital and had on-admission chest CT as the case group. The patients who did not die and were equivalent in terms of demographics and other clinical features to cases were considered as the control (survivors) group. The equivalency evaluation was performed by a fellowship-trained radiologist and an expert radiologist. Pulmonary involvement (PI) was scored (0–25) using a semiquantitative scoring tool. The PI density index was calculated by dividing the total PI score by the number of involved lung lobes. All imaging parameters were compared between case and control group members. Survival time was recorded for the case group. All demographic, clinical, and imaging variables were included in the survival analyses. Results. After evaluating 384 cases, a total of 186 patients (93 in each group) were admitted to the studied setting, consisting of 126 (67.7%) male patients with a mean age of 60.4 ± 13.6 years. The PI score and PI density index in the case vs. the control group were on average 8.9 ± 4.5 vs. 10.7 ± 4.4 (p value: 0.001) and 2.0 ± 0.7 vs. 2.6 ± 0.8 (p value: 0.01), respectively. Axial distribution (p value: 0.01), cardiomegaly (p value: 0.005), pleural effusion (p value: 0.001), and pericardial effusion (p value: 0.04) were mostly observed in deceased patients. Our survival analyses demonstrated that PI score ≥ 10 (p value: 0.02) and PI density index ≥ 2.2 (p value: 0.03) were significantly associated with a lower survival rate. Conclusion. On-admission chest CT features, particularly PI score and PI density index, are potential great tools to predict the patient’s clinical outcome

Differential privacy preserved federated learning for prognostic modeling in COVID‐19 patients using large multi‐institutional chest CT dataset

Background Notwithstanding the encouraging results of previous studies reporting on the efficiency of deep learning (DL) in COVID‐19 prognostication, clinical adoption of the developed methodology still needs to be improved. To overcome this limitation, we set out to predict the prognosis of a large multi‐institutional cohort of patients with COVID‐19 using a DL‐based model. Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the performance of deep privacy‐preserving federated learning (DPFL) in predicting COVID‐19 outcomes using chest CT images. Methods After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 3055 patients from 19 centers, including 1599 alive and 1456 deceased, were enrolled in this study. Data from all centers were split (randomly with stratification respective to each center and class) into a training/validation set (70%/10%) and a hold‐out test set (20%). For the DL model, feature extraction was performed on 2D slices, and averaging was performed at the final layer to construct a 3D model for each scan. The DensNet model was used for feature extraction. The model was developed using centralized and FL approaches. For FL, we employed DPFL approaches. Membership inference attack was also evaluated in the FL strategy. For model evaluation, different metrics were reported in the hold‐out test sets. In addition, models trained in two scenarios, centralized and FL, were compared using the DeLong test for statistical differences. Results The centralized model achieved an accuracy of 0.76, while the DPFL model had an accuracy of 0.75. Both the centralized and DPFL models achieved a specificity of 0.77. The centralized model achieved a sensitivity of 0.74, while the DPFL model had a sensitivity of 0.73. A mean AUC of 0.82 and 0.81 with 95% confidence intervals of (95% CI: 0.79–0.85) and (95% CI: 0.77–0.84) were achieved by the centralized model and the DPFL model, respectively. The DeLong test did not prove statistically significant differences between the two models ( p ‐value = 0.98). The AUC values for the inference attacks fluctuate between 0.49 and 0.51, with an average of 0.50 ± 0.003 and 95% CI for the mean AUC of 0.500 to 0.501. Conclusion The performance of the proposed model was comparable to centralized models while operating on large and heterogeneous multi‐institutional datasets. In addition, the model was resistant to inference attacks, ensuring the privacy of shared data during the training process.</p

Differentiation of COVID‐19 pneumonia from other lung diseases using CT radiomic features and machine learning : A large multicentric cohort study

To derive and validate an effective machine learning and radiomics‐based model to differentiate COVID‐19 pneumonia from other lung diseases using a large multi‐centric dataset. In this retrospective study, we collected 19 private and five public datasets of chest CT images, accumulating to 26 307 images (15 148 COVID‐19; 9657 other lung diseases including non‐COVID‐19 pneumonia, lung cancer, pulmonary embolism; 1502 normal cases). We tested 96 machine learning‐based models by cross‐combining four feature selectors (FSs) and eight dimensionality reduction techniques with eight classifiers. We trained and evaluated our models using three different strategies: #1, the whole dataset (15 148 COVID‐19 and 11 159 other); #2, a new dataset after excluding healthy individuals and COVID‐19 patients who did not have RT‐PCR results (12 419 COVID‐19 and 8278 other); and #3 only non‐COVID‐19 pneumonia patients and a random sample of COVID‐19 patients (3000 COVID‐19 and 2582 others) to provide balanced classes. The best models were chosen by one‐standard‐deviation rule in 10‐fold cross‐validation and evaluated on the hold out test sets for reporting. In strategy#1, Relief FS combined with random forest (RF) classifier resulted in the highest performance (accuracy = 0.96, AUC = 0.99, sensitivity = 0.98, specificity = 0.94, PPV = 0.96, and NPV = 0.96). In strategy#2, Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) FS and RF classifier combination resulted in the highest performance (accuracy = 0.97, AUC = 0.99, sensitivity = 0.98, specificity = 0.95, PPV = 0.96, NPV = 0.98). Finally, in strategy #3, the ANOVA FS and RF classifier combination resulted in the highest performance (accuracy = 0.94, AUC =0.98, sensitivity = 0.96, specificity = 0.93, PPV = 0.93, NPV = 0.96). Lung radiomic features combined with machine learning algorithms can enable the effective diagnosis of COVID‐19 pneumonia in CT images without the use of additional tests

COVID-19 prognostic modeling using CT radiomic features and machine learning algorithms: Analysis of a multi-institutional dataset of 14,339 patients

Background: We aimed to analyze the prognostic power of CT-based radiomics models using data of 14,339 COVID-19 patients. Methods: Whole lung segmentations were performed automatically using a deep learning-based model to extract 107 intensity and texture radiomics features. We used four feature selection algorithms and seven classifiers. We evaluated the models using ten different splitting and cross-validation strategies, including non-harmonized and ComBat-harmonized datasets. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were reported. Results: In the test dataset (4,301) consisting of CT and/or RT-PCR positive cases, AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.83 ± 0.01 (CI95%: 0.81-0.85), 0.81, and 0.72, respectively, were obtained by ANOVA feature selector + Random Forest (RF) classifier. Similar results were achieved in RT-PCR-only positive test sets (3,644). In ComBat harmonized dataset, Relief feature selector + RF classifier resulted in the highest performance of AUC, reaching 0.83 ± 0.01 (CI95%: 0.81-0.85), with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.77 and 0.74, respectively. ComBat harmonization did not depict statistically significant improvement compared to a non-harmonized dataset. In leave-one-center-out, the combination of ANOVA feature selector and RF classifier resulted in the highest performance. Conclusion: Lung CT radiomics features can be used for robust prognostic modeling of COVID-19. The predictive power of the proposed CT radiomics model is more reliable when using a large multicentric heterogeneous dataset, and may be used prospectively in clinical setting to manage COVID-19 patients.</p

Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990–2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021

Background: Low back pain is highly prevalent and the main cause of years lived with disability (YLDs). We present the most up-to-date global, regional, and national data on prevalence and YLDs for low back pain from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2021. Methods: Population-based studies from 1980 to 2019 identified in a systematic review, international surveys, US medical claims data, and dataset contributions by collaborators were used to estimate the prevalence and YLDs for low back pain from 1990 to 2020, for 204 countries and territories. Low back pain was defined as pain between the 12th ribs and the gluteal folds that lasted a day or more; input data using alternative definitions were adjusted in a network meta-regression analysis. Nested Bayesian meta-regression models were used to estimate prevalence and YLDs by age, sex, year, and location. Prevalence was projected to 2050 by running a regression on prevalence rates using Socio-demographic Index as a predictor, then multiplying them by projected population estimates. Findings: In 2020, low back pain affected 619 million (95% uncertainty interval 554–694) people globally, with a projection of 843 million (759–933) prevalent cases by 2050. In 2020, the global age-standardised rate of YLDs was 832 per 100 000 (578–1070). Between 1990 and 2020, age-standardised rates of prevalence and YLDs decreased by 10·4% (10·9–10·0) and 10·5% (11·1–10·0), respectively. A total of 38·8% (28·7–47·0) of YLDs were attributed to occupational factors, smoking, and high BMI. Interpretation: Low back pain remains the leading cause of YLDs globally, and in 2020, there were more than half a billion prevalent cases of low back pain worldwide. While age-standardised rates have decreased modestly over the past three decades, it is projected that globally in 2050, more than 800 million people will have low back pain. Challenges persist in obtaining primary country-level data on low back pain, and there is an urgent need for more high-quality, primary, country-level data on both prevalence and severity distributions to improve accuracy and monitor change. Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Global, regional, and national burden of rheumatoid arthritis, 1990–2020, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021

Background Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disease associated with disability and premature death. Up-to-date estimates of the burden of rheumatoid arthritis are required for health-care planning, resource allocation, and prevention. As part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021, we provide updated estimates of the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis and its associated deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) by age, sex, year, and location, with forecasted prevalence to 2050. Methods Rheumatoid arthritis prevalence was estimated in 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2020 using Bayesian meta-regression models and data from population-based studies and medical claims data (98 prevalence and 25 incidence studies). Mortality was estimated from vital registration data with the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm). Years of life lost (YLL) were calculated with use of standard GBD lifetables, and years lived with disability (YLDs) were estimated from prevalence, a meta-analysed distribution of rheumatoid arthritis severity, and disability weights. DALYs were calculated by summing YLLs and YLDs. Smoking was the only risk factor analysed. Rheumatoid arthritis prevalence was forecast to 2050 by logistic regression with Socio-Demographic Index as a predictor, then multiplying by projected population estimates. Findings In 2020, an estimated 17·6 million (95% uncertainty interval 15·8–20·3) people had rheumatoid arthritis worldwide. The age-standardised global prevalence rate was 208·8 cases (186·8–241·1) per 100 000 population, representing a 14·1% (12·7–15·4) increase since 1990. Prevalence was higher in females (age-standardised female-to-male prevalence ratio 2·45 [2·40–2·47]). The age-standardised death rate was 0·47 (0·41–0·54) per 100 000 population (38 300 global deaths [33 500–44 000]), a 23·8% (17·5–29·3) decrease from 1990 to 2020. The 2020 DALY count was 3 060 000 (2 320 000–3 860 000), with an age-standardised DALY rate of 36·4 (27·6–45·9) per 100 000 population. YLDs accounted for 76·4% (68·3–81·0) of DALYs. Smoking risk attribution for rheumatoid arthritis DALYs was 7·1% (3·6–10·3). We forecast that 31·7 million (25·8–39·0) individuals will be living with rheumatoid arthritis worldwide by 2050. Interpretation Rheumatoid arthritis mortality has decreased globally over the past three decades. Global age-standardised prevalence rate and YLDs have increased over the same period, and the number of cases is projected to continue to increase to the year 2050. Improved access to early diagnosis and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis globally is required to reduce the future burden of the disease