Lung cancer screening with CT: Evaluation of radiologists anddifferent computer assisted detection software (CAD) as first andsecond readers for lung nodule detection at different dose levels

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 82, Issue 12, 2013, Pages

  Christe, A ^a   Leidolt, L ^a   Huber, A ^a   Steiger, P ^a   Szucs Farkas, Z ^b   Roos, J E ^a,c   Heverhagen, J T ^a   Ebner, L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b Hospital Center Biel   (Switzerland)

^c DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

CAD; Ground glass nodule; Low dose CT; Lung cancer screening; Lung nodules

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL LUNG; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED DETECTION SOFTWARE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; IMAGING PHANTOM; LUNG CANCER; LUNG NODULE; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIOLOGIST; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TUMOR VOLUME;

CAD; GROUND GLASS NODULE; LOW-DOSE CT; LUNG CANCER SCREENING; LUNG NODULES;

DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, RADIATION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; SOFTWARE VALIDATION; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84890786198     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.08.026     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Christe A, Charimo Torrente J, Lin M, et al. CT screening and follow up of lungnodules: effect of CT-tube current-time, nodule size and density on detectabil-ity of lung nodules and impact of tube current-time on the apparent nodulesize. Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:623-30.
2. Ko JP, Rusinek H, Naidich DP, et al. Wavelet compression of low-dose chest CTdata: effect on lung nodule detection. Radiology 2003;228:70-5.
3. Rusinek H, Naidich DP, McGuinness, et al. Pulmonary nodule detection: low-dose versus conventional CT. Radiology 1998;209:243-9.
4. Naidich DP, Rusinek H, McGuinness G, et al. Variables affecting pulmonary nod-ule detection with computed tomography: evaluation with three-dimensionalcomputer simulation. J Thorac Imaging 1993;8:291-9.
5. Wormanns D, Ludwig K, Beyer F, Heindel W, Diederich S. Detection of pul-monary nodules at multirow-detector CT: effectiveness of double readingto improve sensitivity at standard-dose and low-dose chest CT. Eur Radiol2005;15:14-22.
6. Li F, Arimura H, Suzuki K, et al. Computer-Aided detection of peripheral lungcancers missed at CT: ROC analyses without and with localization. Radiology2005;237:684-90.
7. Armato SG, Li F, Giger ML, MacMahon H, Sone S, Doi K. Lung cancer: perfor-mance of automated lung nodule detection applied to cancers missed in a CTscreening program. Radiology 2002;225:685-92.
8. Awai K, Murao K, Ozawa A, et al. Pulmonary nodules at chest CT: effect ofcomputer-Aided diagnosis on radiologists' detection performance. Radiology2004;230:347-52.
9. White CS, Pugatch R, Koonce T, Rust SW, Dharaiya E. Lung nodule CAD softwareas a second reader: a multicenter study. Acad Radiol 2008;15:326-34.
10. Godoy MC, Kim TJ, White CS, et al. Benefit of computer-Aided detection analysisfor the detection of subsolid and solid lung nodules on thin- and thick-sectionCT. Am J Roentgenol 2013;200:74-83.
11. Roos JE, Paik D, Olsen D, et al. Computer-Aided detection (CAD) of lung nodulesin CT scans: radiologist performance and reading time with incremental CADassistance. Eur Radiol 2010;20:549-57.
12. Das M, Muhlenbruch G, Mahnken AH, et al. Small pulmonary nodules: effect oftwo computer-Aided detection systems on radiologist performance. Radiology2006;241:564-71.
13. Lee JW, Goo JM, Lee HJ, Kim JH, Kim S, Kim YT. The potential contribution of acomputer-Aided detection system for lung nodule detection in multidetectorrow computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2004;39:649-55.
14. Hein PA, Rogalla P, Klessen C, Lembcke A, Romano VC. Computer-Aided pul-monary nodule detection - performance of two CAD systems at different CTdose levels. Rofo 2009;181:1056-64.
15. Das M, Mühlenbruch G, Heinen S, et al. Performance evaluation of a computer-Aided detection algorithm for solid pulmonary nodules in low-dose andstandard-dose MDCT chest examinations and its influence on radiologists. Br JRadiol 2008;81:841-7.
16. Christe A, Charimo-Torrente J, Roychoudhury K, Vock P, Roos JE. Accuracy oflow-dose computed tomography (CT) for detecting and characterizing the mostcommon CT-patterns of pulmonary disease. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:e142-50.
17. Christe A, Lin MC, Yen AC, et al. CT patterns of fungal pulmonary infections ofthe lung: comparison of standard-dose and simulated low-dose CT. Eur J Radiol2012;81:2860-6.
18. Szucs-Farkas Z, Schibler F, Cullmann J, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of pul-monary CT angiography at low tube voltage: intraindividual comparison ofa normal-dose protocol at 120 kVp and a low-dose protocol at 80 kVp usingreduced amount of contrast medium in a simulation study. Am J Roentgenol2011;197:W852-9.
19. Holmquist F, Nyman U. Eightypeak kilovoltage 16-channel multidetector com-puted tomography and reduced contrast-medium doses tailored to bodyweight to diagnose pulmonary embolism in azotaemic patients. Eur Radiol2006;16:1165-76.
20. Thomas CK, Mühlenbruch G, Wildberger JE, et al. Coronary artery calcium sco-ring with multislice computed tomography: in vitro assessment of a low tubevoltage protocol. Invest Radiol 2006;41:668-73.
21. Schueller-Weidekamm C, Schaefer-Prokop CM, Weber M, Herold CJ, ProkopM. CT angiography of pulmonary arteries to detect pulmonary embolism:improvement of vascular enhancement with low kilo-voltage settings. Radi-ology 2006;241:899-907.
22. Henschke CL, Yankelevitz DF, Mirtcheva R, et al. CT Screening for Lung Can-cer Frequency and Significance of Part-Solid and Nonsolid Nodules. Am JRoentgenol 2002;178:1053-7.
23. Takashima S, Sone S, Li F, et al. Small solitary pulmonary nodules (?1 cm)detected at population-based CT screening for lung cancer: reliable high-resolution CT features of benign lesions. Am J Roentgenol 2003;180:955-64.
24. Li F, Sone S, Abe H, MacMahon H, Doi K. Malignant versus benign nodules at CTscreening for lung cancer: comparison of thin-section CT findings. Radiology2004;233:793-8.
25. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin2010;60:277-300.
26. Naidich DP, Bankier AA, Macmahon H, et al. Recommendations for the man-Agement of subsolid pulmonary nodules detected at CT: a statement from theFleischner Society. Radiology 2013;266:304-17.
27. Zar JH. Biostatistical Analysis. 5th edn Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall; 2010.
28. Goldman RN, Weinberg JS. Statistics: An Introduction Englewood Cliffs. NJ:Prentice Hall; 1985.
29. Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull1971;76:378-83.
30. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categoricaldata. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74