98%
921
2 minutes
20
Objectives: To assess the impact of reconstruction parameters on AI's performance in detecting and classifying risk-dominant nodules in a baseline low-dose CT (LDCT) screening among a Chinese general population.
Materials And Methods: Baseline LDCT scans from 300 consecutive participants in the Netherlands and China Big-3 (NELCIN-B3) trial were included. AI analyzed each scan reconstructed with four settings: 1 mm/0.7 mm thickness/interval with medium-soft and hard kernels (D45f/1 mm, B80f/1 mm) and 2 mm/1 mm with soft and medium-soft kernels (B30f/2 mm, D45f/2 mm). Reading results from consensus read by two radiologists served as reference standard. At scan level, inter-reader agreement between AI and reference standard, sensitivity, and specificity in determining the presence of a risk-dominant nodule were evaluated. For reference-standard risk-dominant nodules, nodule detection rate, and agreement in nodule type classification between AI and reference standard were assessed.
Results: AI-D45f/1 mm demonstrated a significantly higher sensitivity than AI-B80f/1 mm in determining the presence of a risk-dominant nodule per scan (77.5% vs. 31.5%, p < 0.0001). For reference-standard risk-dominant nodules (111/300, 37.0%), kernel variations (AI-D45f/1 mm vs. AI-B80f/1 mm) did not significantly affect AI's nodule detection rate (87.4% vs. 82.0%, p = 0.26) but substantially influenced the agreement in nodule type classification between AI and reference standard (87.7% [50/57] vs. 17.7% [11/62], p < 0.0001). Change in thickness/interval (AI-D45f/1 mm vs. AI-D45f/2 mm) had no substantial influence on any of AI's performance (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: Variations in reconstruction kernels significantly affected AI's performance in risk-dominant nodule type classification, but not nodule detection. Ensuring consistency with radiologist-preferred kernels significantly improved agreement in nodule type classification and may help integrate AI more smoothly into clinical workflows.
Key Points: Question Patient management in lung cancer screening depends on the risk-dominant nodule, yet no prior studies have assessed the impact of reconstruction parameters on AI performance for these nodules. Findings The difference between reconstruction kernels (AI-D45f/1 mm vs. AI-B80f/1 mm, or AI-B30f/2 mm vs. AI-D45f/2 mm) significantly affected AI's performance in risk-dominant nodule type classification, but not nodule detection. Clinical relevance The use of kernel for AI consistent with radiologist's choice is likely to improve the overall performance of AI-based CAD systems as an independent reader and support greater clinical acceptance and integration of AI tools into routine practice.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11949-8 | DOI Listing |
Eur Radiol
August 2025
Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Objectives: To assess the impact of reconstruction parameters on AI's performance in detecting and classifying risk-dominant nodules in a baseline low-dose CT (LDCT) screening among a Chinese general population.
Materials And Methods: Baseline LDCT scans from 300 consecutive participants in the Netherlands and China Big-3 (NELCIN-B3) trial were included. AI analyzed each scan reconstructed with four settings: 1 mm/0.
Quant Imaging Med Surg
September 2024
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Background: Follow-up management of pulmonary nodules is a crucial component of lung cancer screening. Consistency in follow-up recommendations is essential for effective lung cancer screening. This study aimed to assess inter-observer agreement on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-based follow-up recommendation for subsolid nodules from low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRadiol Imaging Cancer
September 2021
From the Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Anatomy, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (C.J., A.S., S.J.v.R., E.T.S., B.G., M.P., C.S.P., B.v.G.); Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam,
Purpose To compare the inter- and intraobserver agreement and reading times achieved when assigning Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) categories to baseline and follow-up lung cancer screening studies by using a dedicated CT lung screening viewer with integrated nodule detection and volumetric support with those achieved by using a standard picture archiving and communication system (PACS)-like viewer. Materials and Methods Data were obtained from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). By using data recorded by NLST radiologists, scans were assigned to Lung-RADS categories.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur Radiol
February 2022
Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88 Olympic-ro 43 Gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Korea.
Objectives: To evaluate the effects of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) on inter-reader agreement in Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) categorization.
Methods: Two hundred baseline CT scans covering all Lung-RADS categories were randomly selected from the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial. Five radiologists independently reviewed the CT scans and assigned Lung-RADS categories without CAD and with CAD.
Eur Radiol
September 2021
Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-ro 173beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeongi-do, 13620, Korea.
Objectives: To assess interobserver agreement in Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) categorisation in subsolid nodule-enriched low-dose screening CTs.
Methods: A retrospective review of low-dose screening CT reports from 2013 to 2017 using keyword searches for subsolid nodules identified 54 baseline CT scans. With an additional 108 negative screening CT scans, a total of 162 CT scans were categorised according to the Lung-RADS by two fellowship-trained thoracic radiologists in consensus.