Fleischner Society: Glossary of Terms for Thoracic Imaging.

Members of the Fleischner Society have compiled a glossary of terms for thoracic imaging that replaces previous glossaries published in 1984, 1996, and 2008, respectively. The impetus to update the previous version arose from multiple considerations. These include an awareness that new terms and concepts have emerged, others have become obsolete, and the usage of some terms has either changed or become inconsistent to a degree that warranted a new definition. This latest glossary is focused on terms of clinical importance and on those whose meaning may be perceived as vague or ambiguous. As with previous versions, the aim of the present glossary is to establish standardization of terminology for thoracic radiology and, thereby, to facilitate communications between radiologists and clinicians. Moreover, the present glossary aims to contribute to a more stringent use of terminology, increasingly required for structured reporting and accurate searches in large databases. Compared with the previous version, the number of images (chest radiography and CT) in the current version has substantially increased. The authors hope that this will enhance its educational and practical value. All definitions and images are hyperlinked throughout the text. Click on each figure callout to view corresponding image. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorials by Bhalla and Powell in this issue.

Comparison of Commercial AI Software Performance for Radiograph Lung Nodule Detection and Bone Age Prediction.

Background Multiple commercial artificial intelligence (AI) products exist for assessing radiographs; however, comparable performance data for these algorithms are limited. Purpose To perform an independent, stand-alone validation of commercially available AI products for bone age prediction based on hand radiographs and lung nodule detection on chest radiographs. Materials and Methods This retrospective study was carried out as part of Project AIR. Nine of 17 eligible AI products were validated on data from seven Dutch hospitals. For bone age prediction, the root mean square error (RMSE) and Pearson correlation coefficient were computed. The reference standard was set by three to five expert readers. For lung nodule detection, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was computed. The reference standard was set by a chest radiologist based on CT. Randomized subsets of hand (n = 95) and chest (n = 140) radiographs were read by 14 and 17 human readers, respectively, with varying experience. Results Two bone age prediction algorithms were tested on hand radiographs (from January 2017 to January 2022) in 326 patients (mean age, 10 years ± 4 [SD]; 173 female patients) and correlated strongly with the reference standard (r = 0.99; P < .001 for both). No difference in RMSE was observed between algorithms (0.63 years [95% CI: 0.58, 0.69] and 0.57 years [95% CI: 0.52, 0.61]) and readers (0.68 years [95% CI: 0.64, 0.73]). Seven lung nodule detection algorithms were validated on chest radiographs (from January 2012 to May 2022) in 386 patients (mean age, 64 years ± 11; 223 male patients). Compared with readers (mean AUC, 0.81 [95% CI: 0.77, 0.85]), four algorithms performed better (AUC range, 0.86-0.93; P value range, <.001 to .04). Conclusions Compared with human readers, four AI algorithms for detecting lung nodules on chest radiographs showed improved performance, whereas the remaining algorithms tested showed no evidence of a difference in performance. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Omoumi and Richiardi in this issue.

Pulmonary functional imaging (PFI): A historical review and perspective.

PFI Pulmonary Functional Imaging (PFI) refers to visualization and measurement of ventilation, perfusion, gas flow and exchange as well as biomechanics. In this review, we will highlight the historical development of PFI, describing recent advances and listing the various techniques for PFI offered per modality. Challenges PFI is facing and requirements for PFI from a clinical point of view will be pointed out. Hereby the review is meant as an introduction to PFI.

Scan-based competing death risk model for re-evaluating lung cancer computed tomography screening eligibility.

BACKGROUND: A baseline computed tomography (CT) scan for lung cancer (LC) screening may reveal information indicating that certain LC screening participants can be screened less, and instead require dedicated early cardiac and respiratory clinical input. We aimed to develop and validate competing death (CD) risk models using CT information to identify participants with a low LC risk and a high CD risk. METHODS: Participant demographics and quantitative CT measures of LC, cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were considered for deriving a logistic regression model for predicting 5-year CD risk using a sample from the National Lung Screening Trial (n=15 000). Multicentric Italian Lung Detection data were used to perform external validation (n=2287). RESULTS: Our final CD model outperformed an external pre-scan model (CD Risk Assessment Tool) in both the derivation (area under the curve (AUC) 0.744 (95% CI 0.727-0.761) and 0.677 (95% CI 0.658-0.695), respectively) and validation cohorts (AUC 0.744 (95% CI 0.652-0.835) and 0.725 (95% CI 0.633-0.816), respectively). By also taking LC incidence risk into consideration, we suggested a risk threshold where a subgroup (6258/23 096 (27%)) was identified with a number needed to screen to detect one LC of 216 (versus 23 in the remainder of the cohort) and ratio of 5.41 CDs per LC case (versus 0.88). The respective values in the validation cohort subgroup (774/2287 (34%)) were 129 (versus 29) and 1.67 (versus 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating both LC and CD risks post-scan may improve the efficiency of LC screening and facilitate the initiation of multidisciplinary trajectories among certain participants.

Model-based Prediction of Critical Illness in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

Background The prognosis of hospitalized patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is difficult to predict, and the capacity of intensive care units was a limiting factor during the peak of the pandemic and is generally dependent on a country's clinical resources. Purpose To determine the value of chest radiographic findings together with patient history and laboratory markers at admission to predict critical illness in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, which included patients from March 7, 2020, to April 24, 2020, a consecutive cohort of hospitalized patients with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 from two large Dutch community hospitals was identified. After univariable analysis, a risk model to predict critical illness (ie, death and/or intensive care unit admission with invasive ventilation) was developed, using multivariable logistic regression including clinical, chest radiographic, and laboratory findings. Distribution and severity of lung involvement were visually assessed by using an eight-point scale (chest radiography score). Internal validation was performed by using bootstrapping. Performance is presented as an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Decision curve analysis was performed, and a risk calculator was derived. Results The cohort included 356 hospitalized patients (mean age, 69 years ± 12 [standard deviation]; 237 men) of whom 168 (47%) developed critical illness. The final risk model's variables included sex, chronic obstructive lung disease, symptom duration, neutrophil count, C-reactive protein level, lactate dehydrogenase level, distribution of lung disease, and chest radiography score at hospital presentation. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the model was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.81; P < .001). A risk calculator was derived for individual risk assessment: Dutch COVID-19 risk model. At an example threshold of 0.70, 71 of 356 patients would be predicted to develop critical illness, of which 59 (83%) would be true-positive results. Conclusion A risk model based on chest radiographic and laboratory findings obtained at admission was predictive of critical illness in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. This risk calculator might be useful for triage of patients to the limited number of intensive care unit beds or facilities. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Chest CT Diagnosis and Clinical Management of Drug-related Pneumonitis in Patients Receiving Molecular Targeting Agents and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Position Paper from the Fleischner Society.

Use of molecular targeting agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has increased the frequency and broadened the spectrum of lung toxicity, particularly in patients with cancer. The diagnosis of drug-related pneumonitis (DRP) is usually achieved by excluding other potential known causes. Awareness of the incidence and risk factors for DRP is becoming increasingly important. The severity of symptoms associated with DRP may range from mild or none to life-threatening with rapid progression to death. Imaging features of DRP should be assessed in consideration of the distribution of lung parenchymal abnormalities (radiologic pattern approach). The CT patterns reflect acute (diffuse alveolar damage) interstitial pneumonia and transient (simple pulmonary eosinophilia) lung abnormality, subacute interstitial disease (organizing pneumonia and hypersensitivity pneumonitis), and chronic interstitial disease (nonspecific interstitial pneumonia). A single drug can be associated with multiple radiologic patterns. Treatment of a patient suspected of having DRP generally consists of drug discontinuation, immunosuppressive therapy, or both, along with supportive measures eventually including supplemental oxygen and intensive care. In this position paper, the authors provide diagnostic criteria and management recommendations for DRP that should be of interest to radiologists, clinicians, clinical trialists, and trial sponsors, among others. This article is a simultaneous joint publication in Radiology and CHEST. The articles are identical except for stylistic changes in keeping with each journal's style. Either version may be used in citing this article. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Combining pulmonary and cardiac computed tomography biomarkers for disease-specific risk modelling in lung cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: Combined assessment of cardiovascular disease (CVD), COPD and lung cancer may improve the effectiveness of lung cancer screening in smokers. The aims were to derive and assess risk models for predicting lung cancer incidence, CVD mortality and COPD mortality by combining quantitative computed tomography (CT) measures from each disease, and to quantify the added predictive benefit of self-reported patient characteristics given the availability of a CT scan. METHODS: A survey model (patient characteristics only), CT model (CT information only) and final model (all variables) were derived for each outcome using parsimonious Cox regression on a sample from the National Lung Screening Trial (n=15 000). Validation was performed using Multicentric Italian Lung Detection data (n=2287). Time-dependent measures of model discrimination and calibration are reported. RESULTS: Age, mean lung density, emphysema score, bronchial wall thickness and aorta calcium volume are variables that contributed to all final models. Nodule features were crucial for lung cancer incidence predictions but did not contribute to CVD and COPD mortality prediction. In the derivation cohort, the lung cancer incidence CT model had a 5-year area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 82.5% (95% CI 80.9-84.0%), significantly inferior to that of the final model (84.0%, 82.6-85.5%). However, the addition of patient characteristics did not improve the lung cancer incidence model performance in the validation cohort (CT model 80.1%, 74.2-86.0%; final model 79.9%, 73.9-85.8%). Similarly, the final CVD mortality model outperformed the other two models in the derivation cohort (survey model 74.9%, 72.7-77.1%; CT model 76.3%, 74.1-78.5%; final model 79.1%, 77.0-81.2%), but not the validation cohort (survey model 74.8%, 62.2-87.5%; CT model 72.1%, 61.1-83.2%; final model 72.2%, 60.4-84.0%). Combining patient characteristics and CT measures provided the largest increase in accuracy for the COPD mortality final model (92.3%, 90.1-94.5%) compared to either other model individually (survey model 87.5%, 84.3-90.6%; CT model 87.9%, 84.8-91.0%), but no external validation was performed due to a very low event frequency. CONCLUSIONS: CT measures of CVD and COPD provides small but reproducible improvements to nodule-based lung cancer risk prediction accuracy from 3 years onwards. Self-reported patient characteristics may not be of added predictive value when CT information is available.

Lung cancer screening by nodule volume in Lung-RADS v1.1: negative baseline CT yields potential for increased screening interval.

OBJECTIVES: The 2019 Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System version 1.1 (Lung-RADS v1.1) introduced volumetric categories for nodule management. The aims of this study were to report the distribution of Lung-RADS v1.1 volumetric categories and to analyse lung cancer (LC) outcomes within 3 years for exploring personalized algorithm for lung cancer screening (LCS). METHODS: Subjects from the Multicentric Italian Lung Detection (MILD) trial were retrospectively selected by National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) criteria. Baseline characteristics included selected pre-test metrics and nodule characterization according to the volume-based categories of Lung-RADS v1.1. Nodule volume was obtained by segmentation with dedicated semi-automatic software. Primary outcome was diagnosis of LC, tested by univariate and multivariable models. Secondary outcome was stage of LC. Increased interval algorithms were simulated for testing rate of delayed diagnosis (RDD) and reduction of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) burden. RESULTS: In 1248 NLST-eligible subjects, LC frequency was 1.2% at 1 year, 1.8% at 2 years and 2.6% at 3 years. Nodule volume in Lung-RADS v1.1 was a strong predictor of LC: positive LDCT showed an odds ratio (OR) of 75.60 at 1 year (p < 0.0001), and indeterminate LDCT showed an OR of 9.16 at 2 years (p = 0.0068) and an OR of 6.35 at 3 years (p = 0.0042). In the first 2 years after negative LDCT, 100% of resected LC was stage I. The simulations of low-frequency screening showed a RDD of 13.6-21.9% and a potential reduction of LDCT burden of 25.5-41%. CONCLUSIONS: Nodule volume by semi-automatic software allowed stratification of LC risk across Lung-RADS v1.1 categories. Personalized screening algorithm by increased interval seems feasible in 80% of NLST eligible. KEY POINTS: • Using semi-automatic segmentation of nodule volume, Lung-RADS v1.1 selected 10.8% of subjects with positive CT and 96.87 relative risk of lung cancer at 1 year, compared to negative CT. • Negative low-dose CT by Lung-RADS v1.1 was found in 80.6% of NLST eligible and yielded 40 times lower relative risk of lung cancer at 2 years, compared to positive low-dose CT; annual screening could be preference sensitive in this group. • Semi-automatic segmentation of nodule volume and increased screening interval by volumetric Lung-RADS v1.1 could retrospectively suggest a 25.5-41% reduction of LDCT burden, at the cost of 13.6-21.9% rate of delayed diagnosis.

COVID-19 on Chest Radiographs: A Multireader Evaluation of an Artificial Intelligence System.

Background Chest radiography may play an important role in triage for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), particularly in low-resource settings. Purpose To evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) system for detection of COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiographs. Materials and Methods An AI system (CAD4COVID-XRay) was trained on 24 678 chest radiographs, including 1540 used only for validation while training. The test set consisted of a set of continuously acquired chest radiographs (n = 454) obtained in patients suspected of having COVID-19 pneumonia between March 4 and April 6, 2020, at one center (223 patients with positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] results, 231 with negative RT-PCR results). Radiographs were independently analyzed by six readers and by the AI system. Diagnostic performance was analyzed with the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results For the test set, the mean age of patients was 67 years ± 14.4 (standard deviation) (56% male). With RT-PCR test results as the reference standard, the AI system correctly classified chest radiographs as COVID-19 pneumonia with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81. The system significantly outperformed each reader (P < .001 using the McNemar test) at their highest possible sensitivities. At their lowest sensitivities, only one reader significantly outperformed the AI system (P = .04). Conclusion The performance of an artificial intelligence system in the detection of coronavirus disease 2019 on chest radiographs was comparable with that of six independent readers. © RSNA, 2020.

The Role of Chest Imaging in Patient Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multinational Consensus Statement from the Fleischner Society.

With more than 900 000 confirmed cases worldwide and nearly 50 000 deaths during the first 3 months of 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has emerged as an unprecedented health care crisis. The spread of COVID-19 has been heterogeneous, resulting in some regions having sporadic transmission and relatively few hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and others having community transmission that has led to overwhelming numbers of severe cases. For these regions, health care delivery has been disrupted and compromised by critical resource constraints in diagnostic testing, hospital beds, ventilators, and health care workers who have fallen ill to the virus exacerbated by shortages of personal protective equipment. Although mild cases mimic common upper respiratory viral infections, respiratory dysfunction becomes the principal source of morbidity and mortality as the disease advances. Thoracic imaging with chest radiography and CT are key tools for pulmonary disease diagnosis and management, but their role in the management of COVID-19 has not been considered within the multivariable context of the severity of respiratory disease, pretest probability, risk factors for disease progression, and critical resource constraints. To address this deficit, a multidisciplinary panel comprised principally of radiologists and pulmonologists from 10 countries with experience managing patients with COVID-19 across a spectrum of health care environments evaluated the utility of imaging within three scenarios representing varying risk factors, community conditions, and resource constraints. Fourteen key questions, corresponding to 11 decision points within the three scenarios and three additional clinical situations, were rated by the panel based on the anticipated value of the information that thoracic imaging would be expected to provide. The results were aggregated, resulting in five main and three additional recommendations intended to guide medical practitioners in the use of chest radiography and CT in the management of COVID-19.

Primary lung cancer in patients with previous malignancies: a nationwide study.

Overall survival of patients with cancer continues to increase and so they receive more frequent CT imaging, making oncological patients a growing population that effectively receives lung cancer screening in the course of daily practice. However, it is currently uncertain how early lung cancer detection in this subgroup of patients should be optimally managed. We describe the relationship between primary lung cancer and prior malignancies in a nationwide cohort, in an attempt to identify possible areas of improvement in nodule management. We found that a substantial number of subjects with lung cancer suffered from a prior malignancy; however, with the exception of otorhinolaryngeal malignancies, they did not show a high absolute risk for lung cancer. Future research should provide more data on how to handle this subgroup of patients in clinical and screening setting.

Iodine Maps from Subtraction CT or Dual-Energy CT to Detect Pulmonary Emboli with CT Angiography: A Multiple-Observer Study.

Background Dual-energy CT iodine maps are used to detect pulmonary embolism (PE) with CT angiography but require dedicated hardware. Subtraction CT, a software-only solution, results in iodine maps with high contrast-to-noise ratios. Purpose To compare the use of subtraction CT versus dual-energy CT iodine maps to CT angiography for PE detection. Materials and Methods In this prospective study ( https://clinicaltrials.gov , NCT02890706), 274 participants suspected of having PE underwent precontrast CT followed by contrast material-enhanced dual-energy CT angiography between July 2016 and April 2017. Iodine maps from dual-energy CT were derived. Subtraction maps (contrast-enhanced CT minus precontrast CT) were calculated after motion correction. Truth was established by expert consensus. A total of 75 randomly selected participants with and without PE (1:1 ratio) were evaluated by three radiologists and six radiology residents (blinded to final diagnosis) for the presence of PE using three types of CT: CT angiography alone, dual-energy CT, and subtraction CT. The partial area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the clinically relevant specificity region (maximum partial AUC, 0.11) was compared by using multireader multicase variance. A P value less than or equal to .025 was considered indicative of a significant difference due to multiple comparisons. Results There were 35 men and 40 women in the reader study (mean age, 63 years ± 12 [standard deviation]). The pooled sensitivities were not different (P ≥ .31 among techniques) (95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 67%, 89% for CT angiography; 72%, 91% for dual-energy CT; 70%, 91% for subtraction CT). However, pooled specificity was higher for subtraction CT (95% CI: 100%, 100%) than for CT angiography (95% CI: 89%, 97%) or dual-energy CT (95% CI: 89%, 98%) (P < .001). Partial AUCs for the average observer improved equally when adding iodine maps (subtraction CT [0.093] vs CT angiography [0.088], P = .03; dual-energy CT [0.094] vs CT angiography, P = .01; dual-energy CT vs subtraction CT, P = .68). Average reading times were equivalent (range, 97-101 seconds; P ≥ .41) among techniques. Conclusion Subtraction CT iodine maps had greater specificity than CT angiography alone in pulmonary embolism detection. Subtraction CT had comparable diagnostic performance to that of dual-energy CT, without the need for dedicated hardware. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Imaging of pulmonary perfusion using subtraction CT angiography is feasible in clinical practice.

Subtraction computed tomography (SCT) is a technique that uses software-based motion correction between an unenhanced and an enhanced CT scan for obtaining the iodine distribution in the pulmonary parenchyma. This technique has been implemented in clinical practice for the evaluation of lung perfusion in CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in patients with suspicion of acute and chronic pulmonary embolism, with acceptable radiation dose. This paper discusses the technical principles, clinical interpretation, benefits and limitations of arterial subtraction CTPA. KEY POINTS: • SCT uses motion correction and image subtraction between an unenhanced and an enhanced CT scan to obtain iodine distribution in the pulmonary parenchyma. • SCT could have an added value in detection of pulmonary embolism. • SCT requires only software implementation, making it potentially more widely available for patient care than dual-energy CT.

Image Quality of Iodine Maps for Pulmonary Embolism: A Comparison of Subtraction CT and Dual-Energy CT.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to compare the image quality of iodine maps derived from subtraction CT and from dual-energy CT (DECT) in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). SUBJECTS AND METHODS. In this prospective study conducted between July 2016 and April 2017, consecutive patients with suspected PE underwent unenhanced CT at 100 kV and dual-energy pulmonary CT angiography at 100 and 140 kV on a dual-source scanner. The scanner was set to generate subtraction and DECT iodine maps at similar radiation doses. In 55 patients (30 women, 25 men; mean age ± SD, 63.4 ± 11.9 years old), various subjective image quality criteria including diagnostic acceptability were rated on a 5-point scale by four radiologists and a radiology resident. In 29 patients (17 women, 12 men; mean age, 62.4 ± 11.7 years old) with confirmed perfusion defects, the signal-difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR) between perfusion defects and adjacent normally perfused parenchyma was measured in corresponding ROIs on subtraction and DECT iodine maps. McNemar and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for statistical comparisons. RESULTS. Diagnostic acceptability was rated excellent or good in a mean of 67% (range, 31-80%) of subtraction CT studies and 36% (5-69%) of DECT studies (p < 0.05 for four of the five radiologists), mainly because of fewer artifacts on subtraction CT. Mean SDNR was marginally higher for subtraction CT than for DECT (18.6 vs 17.1, p = 0.06) and was significantly higher in the upper lobes (21.8 vs 17.9, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION. Radiologist-judged image quality of pulmonary iodine maps was higher for subtraction CT than for DECT with similar to higher SDNR. Subtraction CT is a software-only solution, so it may be an attractive alternative to DECT for depicting perfusion defects.

Lung cancer risk to personalise annual and biennial follow-up computed tomography screening.

BACKGROUND: All lung cancer CT screening trials used fixed follow-up intervals, which may not be optimal. We developed new lung cancer risk models for personalising screening intervals to 1 year or 2 years, and compared these with existing models. METHODS: We included participants in the CT arm of the National Lung Screening Trial (2002-2010) who underwent a baseline scan and a first annual follow-up scan and were not diagnosed with lung cancer in the first year. True and false positives and the area under the curve of each model were calculated. Internal validation was performed using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Data from 24 542 participants were included in the analysis. The accuracy was 0.785, 0.693, 0.697, 0.666 and 0.727 for the polynomial, patient characteristics, diameter, Patz and PanCan models, respectively. Of the 24 542 participants included, 174 (0.71%) were diagnosed with lung cancer between the first and the second annual follow-ups. Using the polynomial model, 2558 (10.4%, 95% CI 10.0% to 10.8%), 7544 (30.7%, 30.2% to 31.3%), 10 947 (44.6%, 44.0% to 45.2%), 16 710 (68.1%, 67.5% to 68.7%) and 20 023 (81.6%, 81.1% to 92.1%) of the 24 368 participants who did not develop lung cancer in the year following the first follow-up screening round could have safely skipped it, at the expense of delayed diagnosis of 0 (0.0%, 0.0% to 2.7%), 8 (4.6%, 2.2% to 9.2%), 17 (9.8%, 6.0% to 15.4%), 44 (25.3%, 19.2% to 32.5%) and 70 (40.2%, 33.0% to 47.9%) of the 174 lung cancers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The polynomial model, using both patient characteristics and baseline scan morphology, was significantly superior in assigning participants to 1-year or 2-year screening intervals. Implementing personalised follow-up intervals would enable hundreds of participants to skip a screening round per lung cancer diagnosis delayed.

Brock malignancy risk calculator for pulmonary nodules: validation outside a lung cancer screening population.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of the Brock malignancy risk model for pulmonary nodules detected in routine clinical setting. METHODS: In two academic centres in the Netherlands, we established a list of patients aged ≥40 years who received a chest CT scan between 2004 and 2012, resulting in 16 850 and 23 454 eligible subjects. Subsequent diagnosis of lung cancer until the end of 2014 was established through linking with the National Cancer Registry. A nested case-control study was performed (ratio 1:3). Two observers used semiautomated software to annotate the nodules. The Brock model was separately validated on each data set using ROC analysis and compared with a solely size-based model. RESULTS: After the annotation process the final analysis included 177 malignant and 695 benign nodules for centre A, and 264 malignant and 710 benign nodules for centre B. The full Brock model resulted in areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.90 and 0.91, while the size-only model yielded significantly lower AUCs of 0.88 and 0.87, respectively (p<0.001). At 10% malignancy risk, the threshold suggested by the British Thoracic Society, sensitivity of the full model was 75% and 81%, specificity was 85% and 84%, positive predictive values were 14% and 10% at negative predictive value (NPV) of 99%. The optimal threshold was 6% for centre A and 8% for centre B, with NPVs >99%. DISCUSSION: The Brock model shows high predictive discrimination of potentially malignant and benign nodules when validated in an unselected, heterogeneous clinical population. The high NPV may be used to decrease the number of nodule follow-up examinations.

Classification of CT Pulmonary Opacities as Perifissural Nodules: Reader Variability.

Purpose To study interreader variability for classifying pulmonary opacities at CT as perifissural nodules (PFNs) and determine how reliably radiologists differentiate PFNs from malignancies. Materials and Methods CT studies were obtained retrospectively from the National Lung Screening Trial (2002-2009). Nodules were eligible for the study if they were noncalcified, solid, within the size range of 5 to 10 mm, and scanned with a section thickness of 2 mm or less. Six radiologists classified 359 nodules in a cancer-enriched data set as PFN, non-PFN, or not applicable. Nodules classified as not applicable by at least three radiologists were excluded, leaving 316 nodules for post-hoc statistical analysis. Results The study group contained 22.2% cancers (70 of 316). The median proportion of nodules classified as PFNs was 45.6% (144 of 316). All six radiologists uniformly classified 17.7% (56 of 316) of the nodules as PFNs. The Fleiss κ was 0.50. Compared with non-PFNs, nodules classified as PFNs were smaller and more often located in the lower lobes and attached to a fissure (P < .001). Thirteen (18.6%) of 70 cancers were misclassified 21 times as PFNs. Individual readers' misclassification rates ranged from 0% (0 of 125) to 4.9% (eight of 163). Of 13 misclassified malignancies, 11 were in the upper lobes and two were attached to a fissure. Conclusion There was moderate interreader agreement when classifying nodules as perifissural nodules. Less than 2.5% of perifissural nodule classifications were misclassified lung cancers (21 of 865) in this cancer-enriched study. Allowing nodules classified as perifissural nodules to be omitted from additional follow-up in a screening setting could substantially reduce the number of unnecessary scans; excluding perifissural nodules in the upper lobes would greatly decrease the misclassification rate.

In vivo growth of 60 non-screening detected lung cancers: a computed tomography study.

Current pulmonary nodule management guidelines are based on nodule volume doubling time, which assumes exponential growth behaviour. However, this is a theory that has never been validated in vivo in the routine-care target population. This study evaluates growth patterns of untreated solid and subsolid lung cancers of various histologies in a non-screening setting.Growth behaviour of pathology-proven lung cancers from two academic centres that were imaged at least three times before diagnosis (n=60) was analysed using dedicated software. Random-intercept random-slope mixed-models analysis was applied to test which growth pattern most accurately described lung cancer growth. Individual growth curves were plotted per pathology subgroup and nodule type.We confirmed that growth in both subsolid and solid lung cancers is best explained by an exponential model. However, subsolid lesions generally progress slower than solid ones. Baseline lesion volume was not related to growth, indicating that smaller lesions do not grow slower compared to larger ones.By showing that lung cancer conforms to exponential growth we provide the first experimental basis in the routine-care setting for the assumption made in volume doubling time analysis.

Incidental perifissural nodules on routine chest computed tomography: lung cancer or not?

OBJECTIVES: Perifissural nodules (PFNs) are a common finding on chest CT, and are thought to represent non-malignant lesions. However, data outside a lung cancer-screening setting are currently lacking. METHODS: In a nested case-control design, out of a total cohort of 16,850 patients ≥ 40 years of age who underwent routine chest CT (2004-2012), 186 eligible subjects with incident lung cancer and 511 controls without were investigated. All non-calcified nodules ≥ 4 mm were semi-automatically annotated. Lung cancer location and subject characteristics were recorded. RESULTS: Cases (56 % male) had a median age of 64 years (IQR 59-70). Controls (60 % male) were slightly younger (p<0.01), median age of 61 years (IQR 51-70). A total of 262/1,278 (21 %) unique non-calcified nodules represented a PFN. None of these were traced to a lung malignancy over a median follow-up of around 4.5 years. PFNs were most often located in the lower lung zones (72 %, p<0.001). Median diameter was 4.6 mm (range: 4.0-8.1), volume 51 mm3 (range: 32-278). Some showed growth rates < 400 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that incidental PFNs do not represent lung cancer in a routine care, heterogeneous population. This confirms prior screening-based results. KEY POINTS: • One-fifth of non-calcified nodules represented a perifissural nodule in our non-screening population. • PFNs fairly often show larger size, and can show interval growth. • When morphologically resembling a PFN, nodules are nearly certainly not a malignancy. • The assumed benign aetiology of PFNs seems valid outside the screening setting.

Recommendations for Measuring Pulmonary Nodules at CT: A Statement from the Fleischner Society.

These recommendations for measuring pulmonary nodules at computed tomography (CT) are a statement from the Fleischner Society and, as such, incorporate the opinions of a multidisciplinary international group of thoracic radiologists, pulmonologists, surgeons, pathologists, and other specialists. The recommendations address nodule size measurements at CT, which is a topic of importance, given that all available guidelines for nodule management are essentially based on nodule size or changes thereof. The recommendations are organized according to practical questions that commonly arise when nodules are measured in routine clinical practice and are, together with their answers, summarized in a table. The recommendations include technical requirements for accurate nodule measurement, directions on how to accurately measure the size of nodules at the workstation, and directions on how to report nodule size and changes in size. The recommendations are designed to provide practical advice based on the available evidence from the literature; however, areas of uncertainty are also discussed, and topics needing future research are highlighted. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.