Generalization optimizing machine learning to improve CT scan radiomics and assess immune checkpoint inhibitors' response in non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter cohort study.

Background: Recent developments in artificial intelligence suggest that radiomics may represent a promising non-invasive biomarker to predict response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Nevertheless, validation of radiomics algorithms in independent cohorts remains a challenge due to variations in image acquisition and reconstruction. Using radiomics, we investigated the importance of scan normalization as part of a broader machine learning framework to enable model external generalizability to predict ICI response in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients across different centers. Methods: Radiomics features were extracted and compared from 642 advanced NSCLC patients on pre-ICI scans using established open-source PyRadiomics and a proprietary DeepRadiomics deep learning technology. The population was separated into two groups: a discovery cohort of 512 NSCLC patients from three academic centers and a validation cohort that included 130 NSCLC patients from a fourth center. We harmonized images to account for variations in reconstruction kernel, slice thicknesses, and device manufacturers. Multivariable models, evaluated using cross-validation, were used to estimate the predictive value of clinical variables, PD-L1 expression, and PyRadiomics or DeepRadiomics for progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6). Results: The best prognostic factor for PFS-6, excluding radiomics features, was obtained with the combination of Clinical + PD-L1 expression (AUC = 0.66 in the discovery and 0.62 in the validation cohort). Without image harmonization, combining Clinical + PyRadiomics or DeepRadiomics delivered an AUC = 0.69 and 0.69, respectively, in the discovery cohort, but dropped to 0.57 and 0.52, in the validation cohort. This lack of generalizability was consistent with observations in principal component analysis clustered by CT scan parameters. Subsequently, image harmonization eliminated these clusters. The combination of Clinical + DeepRadiomics reached an AUC = 0.67 and 0.63 in the discovery and validation cohort, respectively. Conversely, the combination of Clinical + PyRadiomics failed generalizability validations, with AUC = 0.66 and 0.59. Conclusion: We demonstrated that a risk prediction model combining Clinical + DeepRadiomics was generalizable following CT scan harmonization and machine learning generalization methods. These results had similar performances to routine oncology practice using Clinical + PD-L1. This study supports the strong potential of radiomics as a future non-invasive strategy to predict ICI response in advanced NSCLC.

Automated Detection of Anatomical Landmarks During Colonoscopy Using a Deep Learning Model.

Background and aims: Identification and photo-documentation of the ileocecal valve (ICV) and appendiceal orifice (AO) confirm completeness of colonoscopy examinations. We aimed to develop and test a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) model that can automatically identify ICV and AO, and differentiate these landmarks from normal mucosa and colorectal polyps. Methods: We prospectively collected annotated full-length colonoscopy videos of 318 patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopies. We created three nonoverlapping training, validation, and test data sets with 25,444 unaltered frames extracted from the colonoscopy videos showing four landmarks/image classes (AO, ICV, normal mucosa, and polyps). A DCNN classification model was developed, validated, and tested in separate data sets of images containing the four different landmarks. Results: After training and validation, the DCNN model could identify both AO and ICV in 18 out of 21 patients (85.7%). The accuracy of the model for differentiating AO from normal mucosa, and ICV from normal mucosa were 86.4% (95% CI 84.1% to 88.5%), and 86.4% (95% CI 84.1% to 88.6%), respectively. Furthermore, the accuracy of the model for differentiating polyps from normal mucosa was 88.6% (95% CI 86.6% to 90.3%). Conclusion: This model offers a novel tool to assist endoscopists with automated identification of AO and ICV during colonoscopy. The model can reliably distinguish these anatomical landmarks from normal mucosa and colorectal polyps. It can be implemented into automated colonoscopy report generation, photo-documentation, and quality auditing solutions to improve colonoscopy reporting quality.

Deep Learning for Automated Segmentation of Liver Lesions at CT in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance, agreement, and efficiency of a fully convolutional network (FCN) for liver lesion detection and segmentation at CT examinations in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated an automated method using an FCN that was trained, validated, and tested with 115, 15, and 26 contrast material-enhanced CT examinations containing 261, 22, and 105 lesions, respectively. Manual detection and segmentation by a radiologist was the reference standard. Performance of fully automated and user-corrected segmentations was compared with that of manual segmentations. The interuser agreement and interaction time of manual and user-corrected segmentations were assessed. Analyses included sensitivity and positive predictive value of detection, segmentation accuracy, Cohen κ, Bland-Altman analyses, and analysis of variance. RESULTS: In the test cohort, for lesion size smaller than 10 mm (n = 30), 10-20 mm (n = 35), and larger than 20 mm (n = 40), the detection sensitivity of the automated method was 10%, 71%, and 85%; positive predictive value was 25%, 83%, and 94%; Dice similarity coefficient was 0.14, 0.53, and 0.68; maximum symmetric surface distance was 5.2, 6.0, and 10.4 mm; and average symmetric surface distance was 2.7, 1.7, and 2.8 mm, respectively. For manual and user-corrected segmentation, κ values were 0.42 (95% confidence interval: 0.24, 0.63) and 0.52 (95% confidence interval: 0.36, 0.72); normalized interreader agreement for lesion volume was -0.10 ± 0.07 (95% confidence interval) and -0.10 ± 0.08; and mean interaction time was 7.7 minutes ± 2.4 (standard deviation) and 4.8 minutes ± 2.1 (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSION: Automated detection and segmentation of CLM by using deep learning with convolutional neural networks, when manually corrected, improved efficiency but did not substantially change agreement on volumetric measurements.© RSNA, 2019Supplemental material is available for this article.

Learning normalized inputs for iterative estimation in medical image segmentation.

In this paper, we introduce a simple, yet powerful pipeline for medical image segmentation that combines Fully Convolutional Networks (FCNs) with Fully Convolutional Residual Networks (FC-ResNets). We propose and examine a design that takes particular advantage of recent advances in the understanding of both Convolutional Neural Networks as well as ResNets. Our approach focuses upon the importance of a trainable pre-processing when using FC-ResNets and we show that a low-capacity FCN model can serve as a pre-processor to normalize medical input data. In our image segmentation pipeline, we use FCNs to obtain normalized images, which are then iteratively refined by means of a FC-ResNet to generate a segmentation prediction. As in other fully convolutional approaches, our pipeline can be used off-the-shelf on different image modalities. We show that using this pipeline, we exhibit state-of-the-art performance on the challenging Electron Microscopy benchmark, when compared to other 2D methods. We improve segmentation results on CT images of liver lesions, when contrasting with standard FCN methods. Moreover, when applying our 2D pipeline on a challenging 3D MRI prostate segmentation challenge we reach results that are competitive even when compared to 3D methods. The obtained results illustrate the strong potential and versatility of the pipeline by achieving accurate segmentations on a variety of image modalities and different anatomical regions.