These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Computer-aided detection (CAD) in lung cancer screening at chest MDCT: ROC analysis of CAD versus radiologist performance.
    Author: Fraioli F, Bertoletti L, Napoli A, Pediconi F, Calabrese FA, Masciangelo R, Catalano C, Passariello R.
    Journal: J Thorac Imaging; 2007 Aug; 22(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 17721333.
    Abstract:
    To evaluate the performance of a computer-aided detection (CAD) algorithm in the detection of pulmonary nodules on high-resolution multidetector row computed tomography images in a large, homogeneous screening population, and to evaluate the effect of the system output on the performance of radiologists, using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Three radiologists with variable experience (1 to 7 y), independently read the 200 computed tomography scans and assigned each nodule candidate a confidence score (1-2-3: unlikely, probably, and definitely a nodule). CAD was applied to all scans; successively readers reevaluated all findings of the CAD, assigning, in consensus, a confidence score (1 to 3). The reference standard was established by the consensus of 2 experienced radiologists with 30 and 15 years of experience. Results were used to generate an free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis. The reference standard showed 125 nodules. Sensitivity for readers I-II-III was 57%, 68%, and 46%. A double reading resulted in an increase in sensitivity up to 75%. With CAD, sensitivity was increased to 94%, 96%, and 94% for readers I, II, and III. The area under the free-response receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) was 0.72, 0.82, 0.55, and 0.84 for readers I, II, III, and the CAD, when considering all nodules. Differences between readers I-II and CAD were not significant (P=0.9). There was a significant difference between reader III and the CAD. For nodules <6-mm Az was 0.40, 0.47, 0.14, and 0.72 for readers I, II, III, and the CAD. Differences between all readers and the CAD were significant (P<0.05). CAD can aid in daily radiologic routine detecting a substantial number of nodules unseen by radiologists. This is true for both board-certified radiologists and for less experienced readers especially in the detection of small nodules.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]