Malignancy risk estimation of pulmonary nodules in screening CTs: Comparison between a computer model and human observers

PLoS ONE

Volumn 12, Issue 11, 2017, Pages

  Van Riel, Sarah J ^a   Ciompi, Francesco ^a   Winkler Wille, Mathilde M ^b   Dirksen, Asger ^c   Lam, Stephen ^d   Scholten, Ernst Th ^a   Rossi, Santiago E ^e   Sverzellati, Nicola ^f   Naqibullah, Matiullah ^c   Wittenberg, Rianne ^g   Hovinga De Boer, Marieke C ^h   Snoeren, Miranda ^a   Peters Bax, Liesbeth ^a   Mets, Onno ⁱ   Brink, Monique ^a   Prokop, Mathias ^a   Schaefer Prokop, Cornelia ^a,h   Van Ginneken, Bram ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b HILLERØD HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^d BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

^e Centro de Diagnostico Dr Enrique Rossi ^*  (Argentina)

^f UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF PARMA   (Italy)

^g VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^h MEANDER MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BERBAUM METHOD; BONFERRONI CORRECTION; CANCER SIZE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CHI SQUARE TEST; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER MODEL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOARCHITECTURE; DORFMAN METHOD; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ACQUISITION; IMAGE ANALYSIS; LUNG CANCER; LUNG NODULE; LUNG PARENCHYMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MALIGNANCY RISK ESTIMATION; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; METZ METHOD; MORPHOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PLEURAL RETRACTION; PROBABILITY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; TUMOR VOLUME; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; LUNG TUMOR; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; RISK FACTOR; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PROBABILITY; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RISK FACTORS; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 85033456642     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185032     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. World Health Organization (2015). Cancer: Fact Sheet no. 297. URL http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/
2. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team., Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, Black WC, Clapp JD, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 4; 365(5):395–409. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1102873 PMID: 21714641
3. Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014 Mar 4; 160(5):330–8. https://doi.org/10.7326/M13-2771 PMID: 24378917
4. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2015). Press release: national coverage determination (NCD) for lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). URL http://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Press-releases/2015-Press-releases-items/2015-02-05.html.
5. Aberle DR, DeMello S, Berg CD, Black WC, Brewer B, Church TR, et al; National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Results of the two incidence screenings in the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 5; 369(10):920–31. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1208962 PMID: 24004119
6. ACR LungRADS Assessment Categories, Version 1.0, Release date April 28, 2014. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/LungRADS. Accessed September 04, 2014.
7. Gould MK, Ananth L, Barnett PG. A clinical model to estimate the pretest probability of lung cancer in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules. Chest 2007; 131(2):383–388. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.06-1261 PMID: 17296637
8. National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines. The NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN Guidelines): Lung Cancer Screening (Version 1.2017). Release date August 10, 2016. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp#detection. Accessed October 26, 2016.
9. Manos D, Seely JM, Taylor J,Borgaonkar J, Roberts HC, Mayo JR. The lung reporting and data system (LU-RADS): A proposal for computed tomography screening. Can Assoc Radiol J 2014; 65:121–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carj.2014.03.004 PMID: 24758919
10. Cassidy A, Myles JP, Liloglou T, Duffy SW, Field JK. Defining high-risk individuals in a population-based molecular-epidemiological study of lung cancer. Int J Oncol 2006; 28(5):1295–1301. PMID: 16596247
11. Tammemagi CM, Pinsky PF, Caporaso NE, Kvale PA, Hocking WG, Church TR, et al. Lung cancer risk prediction: Prostate, Lung, Colorectal And Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial models and validation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103(13):1058–1068. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr173 PMID: 21606442
12. Swensen SJ, Silverstein MD, Ilstrup DM, Schleck CD, Edell ES. The probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules. Application to small radiologically indeterminate nodules. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157(8):849–855. PMID: 9129544
13. Schultz EM, Sanders GD, Trotter PR, Patz EF Jr, Silvestri GA, Owens DK, et al. Validation of two models to estimate the probability of malignancy in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules. Thorax 2008; 63:335–341. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.2007.084731 PMID: 17965070
14. Li Y, Wang J. A mathematical model for predicting malignancy of solitary pulmonary nodules. World J Surg 2012; 36:830–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1449-8 PMID: 22297626
15. Xiao F, Liu D, Guo Y, Shi B, Song Z, Tian Y, et al. Novel and convenient method to evaluate the character of solitary pulmonary nodule—comparison of three mathematical prediction models and further stratification of risk factors. Plos One 2013; 8(10):1–6.
16. McWilliams A, Tammemagi MC, Mayo JR, Roberts H, Liu G, Soghrati K, et al. Probability of cancer in pulmonary nodules detected on first screening CT. N Engl J Med 2013; 369(10):910–919. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1214726 PMID: 24004118
17. Cressman S, Lam S, Tammemagi MC, Evans WK, Leighl NB, Regier DA, et al; Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer Study Team. Resource utilization and costs during the initial years of lung cancer screening with computed tomography in Canada. J Thorac Oncol. 2014 Oct; 9(10):1449–58. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0000000000000283 PMID: 25105438
18. Winkler Wille MM, van Riel SJ, Saghir Z, Dirksen A, Pedersen JH, Jacobs C, et al. Predictive Accuracy of the PanCan Lung Cancer Risk Prediction Model -External Validation based on CT from the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial. Eur Radiol. 2015; Mar 13.
19. Wille MM, Dirksen A, Ashraf H, Saghir Z, Bach KS, Brodersen J, et al. Results of the Randomized Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial with Focus on High-Risk Profiling. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016 Mar 1; 193(5):542–51. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201505-1040OC PMID: 26485620
20. de Hoop B, van Ginneken B, Gietema H, Prokop M. Pulmonary perifissural nodules on CT scans: rapid growth is not a predictor of malignancy. Radiology. 2012 Nov; 265(2):611–6. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12112351 PMID: 22929331
21. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol. 1992; 27:723–731. PMID: 1399456
22. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV, Chen YF, Donaghy BA. Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: Factorial experimental design. Acad Radiol. 1998; 5:591–602. PMID: 9750888
23. Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol. 2008; 15:647–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2007.12.015 PMID: 18423323
24. Al-Ameri A, Malhotra P, Thygesen H, Plant PK, Vaidyanathan S, Karthik S, et al. Risk of malignancy in pulmonary nodules: a validation study of four prediction models. Lung Cancer 2015; 89:27–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.03.018 PMID: 25864782
25. van Riel SJ, Ciompi F, Jacobs C, Winkler Wille MM, Scholten ET, Naqibullah M, et al. Malignancy risk estimation of screen-detected nodules at baseline CT: comparison of the PanCan model, Lung-RADS, and NCCN guidelines. Eur Radiol. [Epub ahead of print]
26. Reed WM, Ryan JT, McEntee MF, Evanoff MG, Brennan PC. The effect of abnormality-prevalence expectation on expert observer performance and visual search. Radiology 2011; 258(3):938–943. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10101090 PMID: 21248231
27. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Naidich DP, McCauley DI, McGuinness G, Libby DM, et al. CT screening for lung cancer: suspiciousness of nodules according to size on baseline scans. Radiology 2004; 231 (1):164–168. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2311030634 PMID: 14990809
28. Chung K, Jacobs C, Scholten ET, Goo JM, Prosch H, Sverzellati N, et al. Lung-RADS category 4X: does it improve prediction of malignancy in subsolid nodules? Radiology 2017: Jul; 284(1):264–271. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017161624 PMID: 28339311
29. Xu DM, Yip R, Smith JP, Yankelevitz DF, Henschke CI; I-ELCAP Investigators. Retrospective review of lung cancers diagnosed in annual rounds of CT screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Nov; 203 (5):965–72. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.12115 PMID: 25247825
30. Mackintosh JA, Marshall HM, Yang IA, Bowman RV, Fong KM. A retrospective study of volume doubling time in surgically resected non-small cell lung cancer. Respirology 2014 Jul; 19(5):755–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.12311 PMID: 24797504
31. Horeweg N, van Rosmalen J, Heuvelmans MA, van der Aalst CM, Vliegenthart R, Scholten ET, et al. Lung cancer probability in patients with CT-detected pulmonary nodules: a prespecified analysis of data from the NELSON trial of low-dose CT screening. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Nov; 15(12):1332–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70389-4 PMID: 25282285
32. Tammemagi MC, Lam S. Screening for lung cancer using low dose computed tomography. BMJ 2014 May 27; 348:g2253. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2253 PMID: 24865600