A Prospective Study to Evaluate the Diagnostic Accuracy of Computer-aided Diagnosis (CADx) System in Real-time Characterization of Colorectal Neoplasia
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
DISEASE(S): Colorectal Neoplasms
PROVIDER: 2735379 | ecrin-mdr-crc |
REPOSITORIES: ECRIN MDR
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study is a clinical validation of Polydeep, a computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) and characterization (CADx) system. Polydeep Advance 1 is an unicentric prospective diagnostic tests trial with a paired study design. The hypothesis of the study is that Polydeep, a CAD system, is more sensitive than a blinded endoscopists for the detection of colorectal polyps in a high definition colonoscopy.
| 2746248 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:The goal of this substudy is to investigate the accuracy of a computer-aided polyp characterization (CADx) system. The main question[s] it aims to answer are:
• How high is the specificity of the AI system when characterizing colorectal polyps
Participants will receive a standard colonoscopy, assisted by the artificial intelligence (AI) assisted system GI Genius.
Researchers will compare the AI system´s characterization with the histopathology to see how accurate the system is.
| 10350 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:This study is a clinical validation of PolyDeep, a computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) and characterization (CADx) system. PolyDeep Advance 2 is a multicentric randomized clinical trial with a tandem colonoscopy design. The hypothesis of this study is that Polydeep assisted colonoscopy will reduce the number of missed adenomas in the first withdrawal.
| 2746132 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:This study is a clinical validation of PolyDeep, a computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) and characterization (CADx) system. PolyDeep Advance 3 is a multicentric randomized clinical trial comparing high definition colonoscopy with PolyDeep assisted high definition colonoscopy. The hypothesis of the study is that the PolyDeep assisted colonoscopy increases the Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR).
| 2746168 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Primary, this study aims to develop and validate a computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) system for the characterization of colorectal polyps.
Second, this study evaluates the effect of using a clinical classification model Blue Light Imaging Adenoma Serrated International (BASIC) on the diagnostic accuracy of the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps compared to intuitive optical diagnosis for both expert endoscopists and novices.
| 2336268 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Nowadays, colonoscopy is considered the gold standard for the detection of lesions in the colorectal mucosa. However, around 25% of polyps may be missed during the conventional colonoscopy. Based on this, new technological tools aimed to improve the quality of the procedures, diminishing the technical and operator-related factors associated with the missed lesions. These tools use artificial intelligence (AI), a computer system able to perform human tasks after a previous training process from a large dataset. The DiscoveryTM AI-assisted polyp detector (Pentax Medical, Hoya Group, Tokyo, Japan) is a newly developed detection system based on AI. It was designed to alert and direct the attention to potential mucosal lesions. According to its remarkable features, it may increase the polyp and adenoma detection rates (PDR and ADR, respectively) and decrease the adenoma miss rate (AMR).
Based on the above, the investigators aim to assess the real-world effectiveness of the DiscoveryTM AI-assisted polyp detector system in clinical practice and compare the results between expert (seniors) and non-expert (juniors) endoscopists.
| 8858 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:ObjectivesEvaluation of a computerised electrocardiogram algorithm compared to the interpretation of a team of board-certified veterinary cardiologists.Materials and methodsThis was a cross-sectional retrospective cohort study. A total of 399 electronic canine electrocardiogram recordings screened from 1391 electrocardiograms were enrolled in the study. A panel of seven cardiologists, masked to patient information, evaluated electrocardiograms for the following: P-wave amplitude and duration; PR-interval; R-wave amplitude; QRS duration; heart rate; mean electrical axis; and final overall diagnosis for the detection of arrhythmia and any abnormal electrocardiogram anomaly.ResultsThe sensitivity of the electrocardiogram algorithm for detecting arrhythmias was 99.7% (95% confidence intervals, CI: 98.5 to 99.9) and the specificity was 99.5% (95% CI: 98.0 to 99.9) compared to the consensus result created by panel of cardiologists. The sensitivity of the algorithm for the detection of any electrocardiogram anomaly, including abnormal measurements, was 71.3% (95% CI: 65.5 to 76.7) and the specificity was 35.1% (95% CI: 27.0 to 43.8) compared to the panel of cardiologists.Clinical significanceThe electrocardiogram algorithm was shown to have high sensitivity for the detection of arrhythmias, but not all electrocardiogram anomalies. The results support the use of this algorithm as a tool to aid in the triage of the electrocardiogram workflow.
| S-EPMC7898890 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:The recent advances in the field of machine learning have raised expectations that computer-aided diagnosis will become the standard for the diagnosis of melanoma. Objective:To critically review the current literature and compare the diagnostic accuracy of computer-aided diagnosis with that of human experts. Data Sources:The MEDLINE, arXiv, and PubMed Central databases were searched to identify eligible studies published between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2018. Study Selection:Studies that reported on the accuracy of automated systems for melanoma were selected. Search terms included melanoma, diagnosis, detection, computer aided, and artificial intelligence. Data Extraction and Synthesis:Evaluation of the risk of bias was performed using the QUADAS-2 tool, and quality assessment was based on predefined criteria. Data were analyzed from February 1 to March 10, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures:Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were the primary outcomes. Results:The literature search yielded 1694 potentially eligible studies, of which 132 were included and 70 offered sufficient information for a quantitative analysis. Most studies came from the field of computer science. Prospective clinical studies were rare. Combining the results for automated systems gave a melanoma sensitivity of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.80) and a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79-0.88). Sensitivity was lower in studies that used independent test sets than in those that did not (0.51; 95% CI, 0.34-0.69 vs 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86; P?<?.001); however, the specificity was similar (0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.91 vs 0.85; 95% CI, 0.80-0.88; P?=?.67). In comparison with dermatologists' diagnosis, computer-aided diagnosis showed similar sensitivities and a 10 percentage points lower specificity, but the difference was not statistically significant. Studies were heterogeneous and substantial risk of bias was found in all but 4 of the 70 studies included in the quantitative analysis. Conclusions and Relevance:Although the accuracy of computer-aided diagnosis for melanoma detection is comparable to that of experts, the real-world applicability of these systems is unknown and potentially limited owing to overfitting and the risk of bias of the studies at hand.
| S-EPMC6584889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide, with rates of CRC predicted to increase. Colonoscopy is currently the gold standard of screening for CRC. Artificial intelligence (AI) is seen as a solution to bridge this gap in adenoma detection, which is a quality indicator in colonoscopy. AI systems utilize deep neural networks to enable computer-aided detection (CADe) and computer-aided classification (CADx). CADe is concerned with the detection of polyps during colonoscopy, which in turn is postulated to help decrease the adenoma miss-rate.
In contrast, CADx deals with the interpretation of polyp appearance during colonoscopy to determine the predicted histology. Prediction of polyp histology is crucial in helping Clinicians decide on a "resect and discard" or "diagnose and leave strategy". It is also useful for the Clinician to be aware of the predicted histology of a colorectal polyp in determining the appropriate method of resection in terms of safety and efficacy. While CADe has been studied extensively in randomized controlled trials, there is a lack of prospective data validating the use of CADx in a clinical setting to predict polyp histology.
The investigators plan to conduct a prospective, multi-centre clinical trial to validate the accuracy of CADx support for prediction of polyp histology in real-time colonoscopy.
| 2388863 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:After the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved computer-aided detection (CAD) for mammography in 1998, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) provided increased payment in 2002, CAD technology disseminated rapidly. Despite sparse evidence that CAD improves accuracy of mammographic interpretations and costs over $400 million a year, CAD is currently used for most screening mammograms in the United States.To measure performance of digital screening mammography with and without CAD in US community practice.We compared the accuracy of digital screening mammography interpreted with (n = 495 818) vs without (n = 129 807) CAD from 2003 through 2009 in 323 973 women. Mammograms were interpreted by 271 radiologists from 66 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Linkage with tumor registries identified 3159 breast cancers in 323 973 women within 1 year of the screening.Mammography performance (sensitivity, specificity, and screen-detected and interval cancers per 1000 women) was modeled using logistic regression with radiologist-specific random effects to account for correlation among examinations interpreted by the same radiologist, adjusting for patient age, race/ethnicity, time since prior mammogram, examination year, and registry. Conditional logistic regression was used to compare performance among 107 radiologists who interpreted mammograms both with and without CAD.Screening performance was not improved with CAD on any metric assessed. Mammography sensitivity was 85.3% (95% CI, 83.6%-86.9%) with and 87.3% (95% CI, 84.5%-89.7%) without CAD. Specificity was 91.6% (95% CI, 91.0%-92.2%) with and 91.4% (95% CI, 90.6%-92.0%) without CAD. There was no difference in cancer detection rate (4.1 in 1000 women screened with and without CAD). Computer-aided detection did not improve intraradiologist performance. Sensitivity was significantly decreased for mammograms interpreted with vs without CAD in the subset of radiologists who interpreted both with and without CAD (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.97).Computer-aided detection does not improve diagnostic accuracy of mammography. These results suggest that insurers pay more for CAD with no established benefit to women.
| S-EPMC4836172 | biostudies-literature