Methods for improving colorectal cancer annotation efficiency for artificial intelligence-observer training.

Artificial intelligence Colorectal cancer Detection

Journal

World journal of radiology
ISSN: 1949-8470
Titre abrégé: World J Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101538184

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 Dec 2023
Historique:
received: 03 10 2023
revised: 13 11 2023
accepted: 05 12 2023
medline: 5 1 2024
pubmed: 5 1 2024
entrez: 5 1 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Missing occult cancer lesions accounts for the most diagnostic errors in retrospective radiology reviews as early cancer can be small or subtle, making the lesions difficult to detect. Second-observer is the most effective technique for reducing these events and can be economically implemented with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI). To achieve appropriate AI model training, a large annotated dataset is necessary to train the AI models. Our goal in this research is to compare two methods for decreasing the annotation time to establish ground truth: Skip-slice annotation and AI-initiated annotation. We developed a 2D U-Net as an AI second observer for detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) and an ensemble of 5 differently initiated 2D U-Net for ensemble technique. Each model was trained with 51 cases of annotated CRC computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, tested with 7 cases, and validated with 20 cases from The Cancer Imaging Archive cases. The sensitivity, false positives per case, and estimated Dice coefficient were obtained for each method of training. We compared the two methods of annotations and the time reduction associated with the technique. The time differences were tested using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance. Sparse annotation significantly reduces the time for annotation particularly skipping 2 slices at a time ( Our data support the sparse annotation technique as an efficient technique for reducing the time needed to establish the ground truth.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Missing occult cancer lesions accounts for the most diagnostic errors in retrospective radiology reviews as early cancer can be small or subtle, making the lesions difficult to detect. Second-observer is the most effective technique for reducing these events and can be economically implemented with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI).
AIM OBJECTIVE
To achieve appropriate AI model training, a large annotated dataset is necessary to train the AI models. Our goal in this research is to compare two methods for decreasing the annotation time to establish ground truth: Skip-slice annotation and AI-initiated annotation.
METHODS METHODS
We developed a 2D U-Net as an AI second observer for detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) and an ensemble of 5 differently initiated 2D U-Net for ensemble technique. Each model was trained with 51 cases of annotated CRC computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, tested with 7 cases, and validated with 20 cases from The Cancer Imaging Archive cases. The sensitivity, false positives per case, and estimated Dice coefficient were obtained for each method of training. We compared the two methods of annotations and the time reduction associated with the technique. The time differences were tested using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance.
RESULTS RESULTS
Sparse annotation significantly reduces the time for annotation particularly skipping 2 slices at a time (
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Our data support the sparse annotation technique as an efficient technique for reducing the time needed to establish the ground truth.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38179201
doi: 10.4329/wjr.v15.i12.359
pmc: PMC10762523
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

359-369

Informations de copyright

©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.

Auteurs

Matthew Grudza (M)

School of Biological Health and Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, United States.

Brandon Salinel (B)

Department of Radiology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States.

Sarah Zeien (S)

School of Osteopathic Medicine, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ 85206, United States.

Matthew Murphy (M)

School of Osteopathic Medicine, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ 85206, United States.

Jake Adkins (J)

Department of Abdominal Imaging, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, United States.

Corey T Jensen (CT)

Department of Abdominal Imaging, University Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, United States.

Curtis Bay (C)

Department of Interdisciplinary Sciences, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ 85206, United States.

Vikram Kodibagkar (V)

School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, United States.

Phillip Koo (P)

Department of Radiology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States.

Tomislav Dragovich (T)

Division of Cancer Medicine, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States.

Michael A Choti (MA)

Department of Surgical Oncology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States.

Madappa Kundranda (M)

Division of Cancer Medicine, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States.

Tanveer Syeda-Mahmood (T)

IBM Almaden Research Center, IBM, San Jose, CA 95120, United States.

Hong-Zhi Wang (HZ)

IBM Almaden Research Center, IBM, San Jose, CA 95120, United States.

John Chang (J)

Department of Radiology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States. changresearch1@gmail.com.

Classifications MeSH