Dataset Information

Accuracy of artificial intelligence-assisted detection of esophageal cancer and neoplasms on endoscopic images: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate systematically previous studies on the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted diagnostic models in detecting esophageal neoplasms on endoscopic images so as to provide scientific evidence for the effectiveness of these models.

Methods

A literature search was conducted on the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases for studies on the AI-assisted detection of esophageal neoplasms on endoscopic images published up to December 2020. A bivariate mixed-effects regression model was used to calculate the pooled diagnostic efficacy of AI-assisted system. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses were performed to explore the sources of heterogeneity. The effectiveness of AI-assisted models was also compared with that of the endoscopists.

Results

Sixteen studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve regarding AI-assisted detection of esophageal neoplasms were 94% (95% confidence interval [CI] 92%-96%), 85% (95% CI 73%-92%), 6.40 (95% CI 3.38-12.11), 0.06 (95% CI 0.04-0.10), 98.88 (95% CI 39.45-247.87) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98), respectively. AI-based models performed better than endoscopists in terms of the pooled sensitivity (94% [95% CI 84%-98%] vs 82% [95% CI 77%-86%, P < 0.01).

Conclusions

The use of AI results in increased accuracy in detecting early esophageal cancer. However, most of the included studies have a retrospective study design, thus further validation with prospective trials is required.

SUBMITTER: Zhang SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8361665 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceA high proportion of suspicious pigmented skin lesions referred for investigation are benign. Techniques to improve the accuracy of melanoma diagnoses throughout the patient pathway are needed to reduce the pressure on secondary care and pathology services.ObjectiveTo determine the accuracy of an artificial intelligence algorithm in identifying melanoma in dermoscopic images of lesions taken with smartphone and digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective, multicenter, single-arm, masked diagnostic trial took place in dermatology and plastic surgery clinics in 7 UK hospitals. Dermoscopic images of suspicious and control skin lesions from 514 patients with at least 1 suspicious pigmented skin lesion scheduled for biopsy were captured on 3 different cameras. Data were collected from January 2017 to July 2018. Clinicians and the Deep Ensemble for Recognition of Malignancy, a deterministic artificial intelligence algorithm trained to identify melanoma in dermoscopic images of pigmented skin lesions using deep learning techniques, assessed the likelihood of melanoma. Initial data analysis was conducted in September 2018; further analysis was conducted from February 2019 to August 2019.InterventionsClinician and algorithmic assessment of melanoma.Main outcomes and measuresArea under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity of the algorithmic and specialist assessment, determined using histopathology diagnosis as the criterion standard.ResultsThe study population of 514 patients included 279 women (55.7%) and 484 white patients (96.8%), with a mean (SD) age of 52.1 (18.6) years. A total of 1550 images of skin lesions were included in the analysis (551 [35.6%] biopsied lesions; 999 [64.4%] control lesions); 286 images (18.6%) were used to train the algorithm, and a further 849 (54.8%) images were missing or unsuitable for analysis. Of the biopsied lesions that were assessed by the algorithm and specialists, 125 (22.7%) were diagnosed as melanoma. Of these, 77 (16.7%) were used for the primary analysis. The algorithm achieved an AUROC of 90.1% (95% CI, 86.3%-94.0%) for biopsied lesions and 95.8% (95% CI, 94.1%-97.6%) for all lesions using iPhone 6s images; an AUROC of 85.8% (95% CI, 81.0%-90.7%) for biopsied lesions and 93.8% (95% CI, 91.4%-96.2%) for all lesions using Galaxy S6 images; and an AUROC of 86.9% (95% CI, 80.8%-93.0%) for biopsied lesions and 91.8% (95% CI, 87.5%-96.1%) for all lesions using DSLR camera images. At 100% sensitivity, the algorithm achieved a specificity of 64.8% with iPhone 6s images. Specialists achieved an AUROC of 77.8% (95% CI, 72.5%-81.9%) and a specificity of 69.9%.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, the algorithm demonstrated an ability to identify melanoma from dermoscopic images of selected lesions with an accuracy similar to that of specialists.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 outbreak has spread rapidly and hospitals are overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients. While analysis of nasal and throat swabs from patients is the main way to detect COVID-19, analyzing chest images could offer an alternative method to hospitals, where health care personnel and testing kits are scarce. Deep learning (DL), in particular, has shown impressive levels of performance when analyzing medical images, including those related to COVID-19 pneumonia.ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to perform a systematic review with a meta-analysis of relevant studies to quantify the performance of DL algorithms in the automatic stratification of COVID-19 patients using chest images.MethodsA search strategy for use in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science was developed, where we searched for articles published between January 1 and April 25, 2020. We used the key terms "COVID-19," or "coronavirus," or "SARS-CoV-2," or "novel corona," or "2019-ncov," and "deep learning," or "artificial intelligence," or "automatic detection." Two authors independently extracted data on study characteristics, methods, risk of bias, and outcomes. Any disagreement between them was resolved by consensus.ResultsA total of 16 studies were included in the meta-analysis, which included 5896 chest images from COVID-19 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the DL models in detecting COVID-19 were 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.95) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.96-0.97), respectively, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.98. The positive likelihood, negative likelihood, and diagnostic odds ratio were 19.02 (95% CI 12.83-28.19), 0.06 (95% CI 0.04-0.10), and 368.07 (95% CI 162.30-834.75), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing other types of pneumonia from COVID-19 were 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.95), respectively. The performance of radiologists in detecting COVID-19 was lower than that of the DL models; however, the performance of junior radiologists was improved when they used DL-based prediction tools.ConclusionsOur study findings show that DL models have immense potential in accurately stratifying COVID-19 patients and in correctly differentiating them from patients with other types of pneumonia and normal patients. Implementation of DL-based tools can assist radiologists in correctly and quickly detecting COVID-19 and, consequently, in combating the COVID-19 pandemic.