Deep Learning Framework for Spleen Volume Estimation from 2D Cross-sectional Views

Abnormal spleen enlargement (splenomegaly) is regarded as a clinical indicator for a range of conditions, including liver disease, cancer and blood diseases. While spleen length measured from ultrasound images is a commonly used surrogate for spleen size, spleen volume remains the gold standard metric for assessing splenomegaly and the severity of related clinical conditions. Computed tomography is the main imaging modality for measuring spleen volume, but it is less accessible in areas where there is a high prevalence of splenomegaly (e.g., the Global South). Our objective was to enable automated spleen volume measurement from 2D cross-sectional segmentations, which can be obtained from ultrasound imaging. In this study, we describe a variational autoencoder-based framework to measure spleen volume from single- or dual-view 2D spleen segmentations. We propose and evaluate three volume estimation methods within this framework. We also demonstrate how 95% confidence intervals of volume estimates can be produced to make our method more clinically useful. Our best model achieved mean relative volume accuracies of 86.62% and 92.58% for single- and dual-view segmentations, respectively, surpassing the performance of the clinical standard approach of linear regression using manual measurements and a comparative deep learning-based 2D-3D reconstruction-based approach. The proposed spleen volume estimation framework can be integrated into standard clinical workflows which currently use 2D ultrasound images to measure spleen length. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to achieve direct 3D spleen volume estimation from 2D spleen segmentations.Comment: 22 pages, 7 figure

Uncertainty Aware Training to Improve Deep Learning Model Calibration for Classification of Cardiac MR Images

Quantifying uncertainty of predictions has been identified as one way to develop more trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) models beyond conventional reporting of performance metrics. When considering their role in a clinical decision support setting, AI classification models should ideally avoid confident wrong predictions and maximise the confidence of correct predictions. Models that do this are said to be well-calibrated with regard to confidence. However, relatively little attention has been paid to how to improve calibration when training these models, i.e., to make the training strategy uncertainty-aware. In this work we evaluate three novel uncertainty-aware training strategies comparing against two state-of-the-art approaches. We analyse performance on two different clinical applications: cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) response prediction and coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnosis from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) images. The best-performing model in terms of both classification accuracy and the most common calibration measure, expected calibration error (ECE) was the Confidence Weight method, a novel approach that weights the loss of samples to explicitly penalise confident incorrect predictions. The method reduced the ECE by 17% for CRT response prediction and by 22% for CAD diagnosis when compared to a baseline classifier in which no uncertainty-aware strategy was included. In both applications, as well as reducing the ECE there was a slight increase in accuracy from 69% to 70% and 70% to 72% for CRT response prediction and CAD diagnosis respectively. However, our analysis showed a lack of consistency in terms of optimal models when using different calibration measures. This indicates the need for careful consideration of performance metrics when training and selecting models for complex high-risk applications in healthcare

Druggable proteins influencing cardiac structure and function: Implications for heart failure therapies and cancer cardiotoxicity

Dysfunction of either the right or left ventricle can lead to heart failure (HF) and subsequent morbidity and mortality. We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 16 cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging measurements of biventricular function and structure. Cis-Mendelian randomization (MR) was used to identify plasma proteins associating with CMR traits as well as with any of the following cardiac outcomes: HF, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), atrial fibrillation, or coronary heart disease. In total, 33 plasma proteins were prioritized, including repurposing candidates for DCM and/or HF: IL18R (providing indirect evidence for IL18), I17RA, GPC5, LAMC2, PA2GA, CD33, and SLAF7. In addition, 13 of the 25 druggable proteins (52%; 95% confidence interval, 0.31 to 0.72) could be mapped to compounds with known oncological indications or side effects. These findings provide leads to facilitate drug development for cardiac disease and suggest that cardiotoxicities of several cancer treatments might represent mechanism-based adverse effects

Druggable proteins influencing cardiac structure and function: Implications for heart failure therapies and cancer cardiotoxicity

Dysfunction of either the right or left ventricle can lead to heart failure (HF) and subsequent morbidity and mortality. We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 16 cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging measurements of biventricular function and structure. Cis-Mendelian randomization (MR) was used to identify plasma proteins associating with CMR traits as well as with any of the following cardiac outcomes: HF, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), atrial fibrillation, or coronary heart disease. In total, 33 plasma proteins were prioritized, including repurposing candidates for DCM and/or HF: IL18R (providing indirect evidence for IL18), I17RA, GPC5, LAMC2, PA2GA, CD33, and SLAF7. In addition, 13 of the 25 druggable proteins (52%; 95% confidence interval, 0.31 to 0.72) could be mapped to compounds with known oncological indications or side effects. These findings provide leads to facilitate drug development for cardiac disease and suggest that cardiotoxicities of several cancer treatments might represent mechanism-based adverse effects