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: Predicting muscle invasion in bladder cancer by deep learning analysis of MRI: comparison with vesical imaging-reporting and data system.
    Author: Li J, Cao K, Lin H, Deng L, Yang S, Gao Y, Liang M, Lin C, Zhang W, Xie C, Zhang K, Luo J, Pan Z, Yue P, Zou Y, Huang B.
    Journal: Eur Radiol; 2023 Apr; 33(4):2699-2709. PubMed ID: 36434397.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic performance of a novel deep learning (DL) method based on T2-weighted imaging with the vesical imaging-reporting and data system (VI-RADS) in predicting muscle invasion in bladder cancer (MIBC). METHODS: A total of 215 tumours (129 for training and 31 for internal validation, centre 1; 55 for external validation, centre 2) were included. MIBC was confirmed by pathological examination. VI-RADS scores were provided by two groups of radiologists (readers 1 and readers 2) independently. A deep convolutional neural network was constructed in the training set, and validation was conducted on the internal and external validation sets. ROC analysis was performed to evaluate the performance for MIBC diagnosis. RESULTS: The AUCs of the DL model, readers 1, and readers 2 were as follows: in the internal validation set, 0.963, 0.843, and 0.852, respectively; in the external validation set, 0.861, 0.808, and 0.876, respectively. The accuracy of the DL model in the tumours scored VI-RADS 2 or 3 was higher than that of radiologists in the external validation set: for readers 1, 0.886 vs. 0.600, p = 0.006; for readers 2, 0.879 vs. 0.636, p = 0.021. The average processing time (38 s and 43 s in two validation sets) of the DL method was much shorter than the readers, with a reduction of over 100 s in both validation sets. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to radiologists using VI-RADS, the DL method had a better diagnostic performance, shorter processing time, and robust generalisability, indicating good potential for diagnosing MIBC. KEY POINTS: • The DL model shows robust performance for MIBC diagnosis in both internal and external validation. • The diagnostic performance of the DL model in the tumours scored VI-RADS 2 or 3 is better than that obtained by radiologists using VI-RADS. • The DL method shows potential in the preoperative assessment of MIBC.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]